https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #14 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #13)
> I believe this has been fixed properly by the patch for PR fortran/79886 in
> r246203 by adding the following to gcc/fortran/error.c's gfc_format_decoder:
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #12 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #9)
> (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #8)
> > (In reply to vries from comment #6)
> > > posted RFC: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg01749.html
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #11 from Tom de Vries ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #10)
> If you're looking for a Fortran maintainer's approval, then
> one may want to submit the patch to fort...@gcc.gnu.org.
Both the original submission and the ping where
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #10 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Eric Gallager from comment #9)
> (In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #8)
> > (In reply to vries from comment #6)
> > > posted RFC: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg0174
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #9 from Eric Gallager ---
(In reply to Tom de Vries from comment #8)
> (In reply to vries from comment #6)
> > posted RFC: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg01749.html
>
> pinged: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #8 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to vries from comment #6)
> posted RFC: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg01749.html
pinged: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-01/msg00831.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
vries at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|openacc |
--- Comment #7 from vries at
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #6 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
posted RFC: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-12/msg01749.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #5 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #4)
> Can you confirm that this is fixed when setting "omp declare target"'s
> max_len to -1 in gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c?
I don't understand the question.
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
Thomas Schwinge changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||openacc
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #3 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 37059
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37059&action=edit
tentative patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #2 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Using this patch:
...
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
index 8c4fa03..2669bf2 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
@@ -2097,7 +2097,9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68950
--- Comment #1 from vries at gcc dot gnu.org ---
To reproduce on trunk, introduce triggering of the error here:
...
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c b/gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c
index 8556b70..60f4ad3 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c
+++ b/gcc/f
14 matches
Mail list logo
