--- Comment #10 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-08 21:13
---
Fixed in trunk. No regression, no backport. Closing.
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #9 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-08 21:09 ---
Subject: Bug 17711
Author: dfranke
Date: Sun Jul 8 21:08:52 2007
New Revision: 126468
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126468
Log:
gcc/fortran:
2007-07-08 Daniel Franke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #8 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-06-30 16:23 ---
Subject: Bug number PR17711
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-06/msg02153.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--- Comment #7 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-29 23:51 ---
Think I got all the pieces for this one ...
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #6 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-29 20:45 ---
I retracted the patch because it causes regressions with user-defined
operators. I'm not convinced that this problem is worth doing anything
non-trivial as is required, so I'm un-assigning myself.
--
tobi at gcc do
--- Comment #5 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-11-23 00:35 ---
Subject: Bug number PR17711
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-11/msg01590.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh
--
tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #4 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-22 14:48 ---
A possible solution is to add entries for the symbolic forms (e.g. '==') of the
intrinsic operators to the enum gfc_intrinsic_op, and then use them
interchangeably, except when matching the operators, and when printing
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-07 04:50
---
Yes, but I think you could also grab out of the lb the symbol actually used,
though it may not be worth specializing this. Are there places where we get
errors for .ne. and /= or other similar things?
--
htt
--- Comment #2 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-07 04:35 ---
Would simply having the error message say "operator '.eq.' or '=='" be a
sufficient solution?
--
brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
10 matches
Mail list logo
