https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44065
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
--- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-05 11:58 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> On x86_64-apple-darwin10.4.0 at r162881, I have tested all the codelets I have
> for the PRs fixed by r162879 with both -m32 and -m64 without linking error.
Great. So I guess we can close
--- Comment #13 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-08-04 22:58 ---
> r162879 seems to fix all the test cases for me. Can anyone confirm that
> comment
> #0 works now without any linking errors?
On x86_64-apple-darwin10.4.0 at r162881, I have tested all the codelets I have
for the
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-04 20:05 ---
r162879 seems to fix all the test cases for me. Can anyone confirm that comment
#0 works now without any linking errors?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44065
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-04 19:49 ---
Subject: Bug 44065
Author: janus
Date: Wed Aug 4 19:49:19 2010
New Revision: 162879
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=162879
Log:
2010-08-04 Janus Weil
PR fortran/42207
PR fo
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-04 08:32 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> With the patch in comment #5 there is one regression:
>
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_4.f03 -O (test for excess errors)
>
> the extra errors are:
>
> /opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuit
--- Comment #9 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-08-03 18:56 ---
With the patch in comment #5 there is one regression:
FAIL: gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_4.f03 -O (test for excess errors)
the extra errors are:
/opt/gcc/work/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_4.f03:
--- Comment #8 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-08-03 17:00 ---
> At r162840, comment #0 seems to work already without any patching. Pierre, can
> you confirm that?
Not for me at -O0 (patch not applied), but it works at -O[123s] (probably
_vtab$s_sparse_mat.1569 is optimized away
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-03 16:54 ---
At r162840, comment #0 seems to work already without any patching. Pierre, can
you confirm that?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44065
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-03 16:44 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Comment #3 is fixed by:
I think it also fixes comment #4.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44065
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-08-03 16:37 ---
Comment #3 is fixed by:
Index: gcc/fortran/interface.c
===
--- gcc/fortran/interface.c (revision 162839)
+++ gcc/fortran/interface.c (working cop
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-17 08:49 ---
Another failing example was reported by Andrew Benson in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-07/msg00222.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44065
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-06 03:37 ---
Here is a related test case (by Salvatore):
module s_mat_mod
implicit none
type :: s_sparse_mat
end type
contains
subroutine s_set_triangle(a)
class(s_sparse_mat), intent(inout) :: a
end subroutine
end
13 matches
Mail list logo
