https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59997
--- Comment #7 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
The option of omitting the trailing underscore (-fno-underscoring) is explained
at https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/Code-Gen-Options.html
In the above link, there is also a wish (hope
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59997
--- Comment #6 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
On Apr 11, 2015, at 3:30 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
wrote:
> For the test case you should have a look at
> https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/HowToPrepareATestcase, in particular to the section
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59997
--- Comment #5 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
On Apr 11, 2015, at 3:30 PM, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
wrote:
> For the test case you should have a look at
> https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/HowToPrepareATestcase, in particular to the section
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59997
drikosev at otenet dot gr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drikosev at otenet dot gr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59016
--- Comment #26 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
Hello,
It was my impression that small changes can be accepted by FSF without a
copyright disclaimer or a copyright assignment on file, according to:
https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html#legal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59016
--- Comment #22 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
Created attachment 35234
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35234&action=edit
cleanup if a declaration type spec is erroneous
Let's see if the function names
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59016
--- Comment #21 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
Created attachment 35232
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35232&action=edit
cleanup if a declaration type spec is erroneous
Finally, I've sent for review to the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59016
--- Comment #19 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
Ok, I'll send a patch to the recommended addresses as soon as I read the GNU
coding standards.
Yet, my impression is that perhaps the patch should be a bit more complex; in
example, I
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59016
--- Comment #15 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
Created attachment 35230
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35230&action=edit
altered patch for the regressions reported in comment 11
Hi,
As it seems the problem w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59016
--- Comment #14 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
Indeed, the new patch in comment 10 does not prevent the ICEs with the the
first example bug.f90 (in Description before comment 1).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59016
--- Comment #13 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
Hi Dominiq,
The new patch (gcc-4.8.4) worked as the older one but since the locus is
corrupted I'm not surprised that a test case you tried failed. Could you post
it here please?
The corr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59016
--- Comment #10 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
Created attachment 35226
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35226&action=edit
altered patch for the regressions reported in comment 9
Hi Dominiq,
In a slightly altered
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65429
--- Comment #4 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
So, the proper solution is described at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2015-03/msg00163.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59016
--- Comment #8 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
When gfortran reports the error, it expects that the name 'atomic_kind_type' is
likely a procedure or function; but the syntax of the access-stmt is:
access-stmt ::= access-spec [ [ :
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59016
--- Comment #7 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
Hi,
The reduced test case which has been posted by janus (comment 1) crashes also
4.8.4 and gcc 5.0 (the latter was copied from trunc a few days ago).
The backtrace I get agrees with that of
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59016
drikosev at otenet dot gr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drikosev at otenet dot gr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65429
--- Comment #3 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
With the patch one can avoid a segmentation fault but I don't know very well
the internals of gfortran.
So, I've no idea if and how one can obtain the length without array elem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65429
drikosev at otenet dot gr changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drikosev at otenet dot gr
18 matches
Mail list logo
