https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83064
--- Comment #14 from Christian Felter ---
I looked into the working draft of Fortran 2015 (J3/16-007r1). In Note 12.52 it
says:
The above constraints are designed to guarantee that a pure procedure is free
from side effects (modifications of dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83064
--- Comment #2 from Christian Felter ---
I did "svn up" and after that I found the revision number like this:
$ svn log --limit 1
r254890 | hjl | 2017-11-17 19:37:58 +0100
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83017
--- Comment #18 from Christian Felter ---
Thanks for the great work!! I've tested the new version and found similar
results.
I think the wrong results (which are actually random results) mean there is
another related bug still, so I've opened b
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: cfztol at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
This bug is related to 83017. I'm trying to parallelize a pure function with
the do concurrent construct. The following table shows compile flags and
results from the test program a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83017
--- Comment #5 from Christian Felter ---
Okay, sounds like there is hope. By the way, the problem also exists without a
function call. Declaring
real, dimension(nsplit) :: tmp
and replacing the loop with
do concurrent (i = 1:nsplit)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83017
--- Comment #3 from Christian Felter ---
Ultimately, I wanted to compute k like this
k = permutation( j )
where permutation is a 1D array of integers (from 1 to 4, e.g. [ 1, 4, 2, 1, 3,
... etc] ). This would allow an easy way of parallelizing
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: cfztol at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I found a strange behaviour, which I think is a bug. I'm trying to split a loop
with DO CONCURRENT and compile flag -ftree-parallelize-loops=2 . However,
whether parallelization act
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: cfztol at hotmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
In the following program 3 out of 4 scenarios work fine. These are commented
away and marked with OK in the program section.
The last variation fails when the over-ridden function is
