Hi,
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> On Wednesday 20 July 2005 17:22, Paul Brook wrote:
> > To implement (b) this needs to be changed to:
> >
> > - Do everything up until gfc_generate{,_module}_code as normal.
> > - Save the results somewhere and repeat for each PU.
> > - Identify ca
> > The biggest problem is type consistency and aliasing. Consider the
> > following
>
> I have several FORTRAN 77 programs. After inlining the small functions in
> them by hand, they made a great performance improvements. So I need a trial
> implementation of function inlining to verify the effect
Paul Brook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wednesday 20 July 2005 15:35, Canqun Yang wrote:
> > Hi, all
> >
> > Function inlining for FORTRAN programs always fails.
>
> Not entirely true. Inlining of contained procedures works fine (or it did la
> st
> time I checked). This should include inlining of
On Wednesday 20 July 2005 16:52, Joost VandeVondele wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't think Paul's example is completely correct, I've created PR22571
> with some more info.
Ah, this makes thing somewhat simpler. For some reason I though my example was
legal.
I think this makes it possible to implement m
On Wednesday 20 July 2005 17:22, Paul Brook wrote:
> To implement (b) this needs to be changed to:
>
> - Do everything up until gfc_generate{,_module}_code as normal.
> - Save the results somewhere and repeat for each PU.
> - Identify calls for procedures for which we have definitions, and link
> t
Hi,
I don't think Paul's example is completely correct, I've created PR22571
with some more info.
Cheers,
Joost
On Wednesday 20 July 2005 15:35, Canqun Yang wrote:
> Hi, all
>
> Function inlining for FORTRAN programs always fails.
Not entirely true. Inlining of contained procedures works fine (or it did last
time I checked). This should include inlining of siblings within a module.
> If no one engages in
