--- Comment #10 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-09-06 16:58 ---
Note that before the patch for pr35837, the code in comment #1 was wrongly
rejected. This is now fixed by this patch. Also if the FORALL statement is this
code is uncommented, it is now accepted while it is invalid,
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-27 20:52 ---
Fixed on trunk
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-27 20:48 ---
Subject: Bug 29389
Author: pault
Date: Tue Nov 27 20:47:55 2007
New Revision: 130472
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=130472
Log:
2007-11-27 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #7 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-07-04 06:29 ---
list link:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2007-01/msg00361.html
this suggests that it is now an accepts-invalid bug with an easy fix
(Bug reporter / assignee should change keyword)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-23 05:56 ---
Partially fixed - see list.
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29389
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-23 05:53 ---
Subject: Bug 29389
Author: pault
Date: Tue Jan 23 05:53:14 2007
New Revision: 121077
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=121077
Log:
2007-01-23 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Backports f
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-15 08:19 ---
> Author: pault
> Date: Mon Jan 15 08:16:17 2007
> New Revision: 120790
As pointed out by FX on the list, this patch does not quite do it yet:
The F95 standard says (12.6): "A pure procedure is [...] or (4) A statem
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-15 08:16 ---
Subject: Bug 29389
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jan 15 08:16:17 2007
New Revision: 120790
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=120790
Log:
2007-01-15 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-31 07:39 ---
This is fixed by:
resolve.c:1429
static int
pure_function (gfc_expr * e, const char **name)
{
int pure;
/* This is the fix. */
if (e->expr_type == EXPR_FUNCTION
&& e->symtree->n.sym->attr.proc == PROC
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-31 00:09
---
Created an attachment (id=12516)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12516&action=view)
Tentative patch
This patch doesn't work :)
It's working fine except that the following code:
implicit no
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last recon
11 matches
Mail list logo
