--
hjl dot tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35681
--- Comment #28 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-14 20:53 ---
Subject: Bug 35681
Author: mikael
Date: Wed Jan 14 20:53:18 2009
New Revision: 143383
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143383
Log:
2009-01-14 Mikael Morin
PR fortran/35681
*
--- Comment #27 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-04 19:12 ---
Subject: Bug 35681
Author: mikael
Date: Sun Jan 4 19:12:16 2009
New Revision: 143057
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143057
Log:
2009-01-04 Mikael Morin
PR fortran/35681
*
--- Comment #26 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 19:14 ---
Subject: Bug 35681
Author: pault
Date: Mon Nov 24 19:13:12 2008
New Revision: 142169
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142169
Log:
2008-11-24 Steven G. Kargl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR for
--- Comment #25 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 13:10 ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> Argh!!
> elemental_dependency_1.f90 was not committed.
>
Fixed now, sorry for the noise.
(In reply to comment #20)
> Mikael, Daniel: Have I missed something or is everything in this PR
--- Comment #24 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 12:48 ---
Subject: Bug 35681
Author: mikael
Date: Mon Nov 24 12:46:57 2008
New Revision: 142156
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142156
Log:
2008-11-24 Mikael Morin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fort
--- Comment #23 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 12:38 ---
Subject: Bug 35681
Author: mikael
Date: Mon Nov 24 12:37:25 2008
New Revision: 142155
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142155
Log:
2008-11-24 Mikael Morin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortr
--- Comment #22 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 12:25 ---
Argh!!
elemental_dependency_1.f90 was not committed.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35681
--- Comment #21 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 12:15 ---
Subject: Bug 35681
Author: mikael
Date: Mon Nov 24 12:13:59 2008
New Revision: 142154
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142154
Log:
2008-11-24 Mikael Morin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortr
--- Comment #20 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-23 19:07 ---
Mikael, Daniel: Have I missed something or is everything in this PR fixed in
4.4 ("trunk") and only some 4.3 back porting is needed?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35681
--- Comment #19 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 22:46 ---
Subject: Bug 35681
Author: mikael
Date: Sun Nov 16 22:45:10 2008
New Revision: 141931
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141931
Log:
2008-11-16 Mikael Morin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortr
--- Comment #18 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-14 13:01 ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> Unassigning myself. Mikael will probably want to take the missing part on
> with
> his pending patch :)
>
Regressions are making my life tough right now, but I will succeed in the end.
--- Comment #17 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-13 17:16 ---
Unassigning myself. Mikael will probably want to take the missing part on with
his pending patch :)
--
domob at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #16 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 13:37 ---
This commit implements correct dependency and temporary handling if the
arguments to MVBITS are *not* expressions; thus it does not yet fix the
original test, although it fixes it if the parentheses are taken off the
--- Comment #15 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 13:27 ---
Subject: Bug 35681
Author: domob
Date: Sat Nov 1 13:26:19 2008
New Revision: 141516
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141516
Log:
2008-11-01 Daniel Kraft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortra
--- Comment #14 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 16:16 ---
Actually, the parentheses aren't lost and *do* get honoured, but the temporary
is only inside the scalarization loop and thus not the full array temporary we
want; the problem is that the actual argument expressions (
--- Comment #13 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 14:46 ---
Paul, thanks for stepping into the party :)
My plan for working on this is to look at the first part of the problem for now
(the lost parentheses, this is a general ELEMENTAL problem, as my (invalid)
test from commen
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-19 14:34 ---
To put the arguments succinctly, this is a double problem (apart from the
conformity issue):
(i) The original test case is losing the EXPR_PARENTHESES for some reason. ie.
there is no question that in this case a te
--- Comment #11 from dick dot hendrickson at gmail dot com 2008-10-18
17:02 ---
Subject: Re: wrong result for vector subscripted array expression in MVBITS
Also, MVBITS is a special case. See the top of page 215 in the F95
standard. The FROM
and TO arguments are allowed to be the sa
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-18 11:36 ---
Somehow reading the bug report first before replying helps ... Ignore the crap
I just wrote.
Dick's (comment 0)
CALL MVBITS ((ILA1(NFV3)), 2, 4, ILA1, 3) !fails
is valid as the first and the fourth argum
--- Comment #9 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-18 10:20 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> ifort returns "2 2" and g95 "2 1". As far as I understand the scalarization
> of elemental procedures, I think g95 is right.
sunf95, openf95, NAG f95 and pathscale's pathf95 also return 2
--- Comment #8 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-10-18 09:31 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> This prints "2 2" at the moment, which seems quite reasonable to me; or does
> the standard enforce it should print "2 1"?
ifort returns "2 2" and g95 "2 1". As far as I understand the sca
--- Comment #7 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-18 08:27 ---
I'm having some difficulties seeing what the problem really is... My
understanding of elemental procedures so far is that they should be more or
less equivalent to looping over the arguments and then performing them a
--- Comment #6 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-16 16:32 ---
Fixed the accepts-invalid mentioned in comment #1 (patch posted at
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2008-10/msg00145.html) on trunk, but the main
problem here is still there, I'll start to work on it directly now.
--
--- Comment #5 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-14 16:20 ---
I will look at this and try to work it out, taking it for now.
--
domob at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-03-28 16:22 ---
It looks like a missing temporary:
integer, dimension(10) :: ILA1 = (/1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10/), ILA2, ILA3
ILA3 = (/9,9,6,2,4,9,2,9,6,10/)
print '(10(I3))', ILA1((/9,9,6,2,4,9,2,9,6,10/))
ILA2 = ILA1
do i = 1
--- Comment #3 from dick dot hendrickson at gmail dot com 2008-03-28 15:48
---
Subject: Re: wrong result for vector subscripted array expression in MVBITS
Right, in case you haven't found it yet, the first paragraph of
12.7.3, page 214, says effectively
that all of the arguments must
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-03-28 15:29 ---
For the second test in comment #1, ifort gives:
fortcom: Error: pr35681_2.f90, line 2: The shapes of the arguments do not
conform. [MVBITS]
call mvbits ((ILA1((/9/))), 2, 4, ILA1, 3)
-
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-28 15:18
---
Reduced testcase:
integer, dimension(10) :: ILA1 = (/1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10/)
call mvbits ((ILA1((/9,9,6,2,4,9,2,9,6,10/))), 2, 4, ILA1, 3)
write (*,'(10(I3))') ila1
end
output is:
17 18 11 36 77 22 39
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Keywo
30 matches
Mail list logo
