http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42189
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42189
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-03-07
10:03:57 UTC ---
> I believe the fix to PR47850 has resolved this issue. I suggest we close this
> one.
I agree unless someone comes with an explicit example.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42189
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-06
21:17:26 UTC ---
I believe the fix to PR47850 has resolved this issue. I suggest we close this
one.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42189
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-23 14:09
---
Time constraints, un assigning.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-05 04:17
---
Studying this with a little instrumentation, I see that gfc_expand_constructor
is called only once with some of the test cases for pr20923. This is good.
Also, in the test case for pr41807, the work function con
--- Comment #2 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 19:52 ---
Jerry, this might be involved in PR41165 as well?!
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 04:07
---
I plan to keep poking at this and other general constructor issues.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
