--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 11:50 ---
Fixed with r140546. Closing.
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-22 11:46 ---
Subject: Bug 37486
Author: janus
Date: Mon Sep 22 11:45:02 2008
New Revision: 140546
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140546
Log:
2008-09-22 Janus Weil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran/3
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #8 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-09-12 21:31 ---
> If I recall correctly, the commons do not need to have the same size
5.7.2.5 Differences between named common and blank common (F2008, 5.5.2.4 for
f95)
...
Named common blocks of the same name shall be of the
--- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-12 21:18 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> > This is equivalent to the ever popular use of EQUIVALENCE to set a
> > real type to Inf or NaN via integers.
>
> Actually, it is a bit different: Here, already the COMMON is invalid for
>
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-12 20:42 ---
> This is equivalent to the ever popular use of EQUIVALENCE to set a
> real type to Inf or NaN via integers.
Actually, it is a bit different: Here, already the COMMON is invalid for
EQUIVALENCE only accessing the val
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-12 19:03 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > (In reply to comment #1)
> > > the program is non-standard Fortran, but it is legacy, so an option would
> > > be
> > > useful.
> > >
> >
> > Why is it nonstan
--- Comment #4 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2008-09-12 18:48 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > the program is non-standard Fortran, but it is legacy, so an option would be
> > useful.
> >
>
> Why is it nonstandard?
>
Maybe not, I was guessing based on 16.
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-12 18:44 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > the program is non-standard Fortran, but it is legacy, so an option would be
> > useful.
> >
>
> Why is it nonstandard?
>
> Maybe I'm misreading 5.5.2.1 and 5.
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-12 18:30 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> the program is non-standard Fortran, but it is legacy, so an option would be
> useful.
>
Why is it nonstandard?
Maybe I'm misreading 5.5.2.1 and 5.5.2.3 from the F95 standard, which
sugges
--- Comment #1 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2008-09-12 17:56 ---
the program is non-standard Fortran, but it is legacy, so an option would be
useful.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37486
11 matches
Mail list logo
