[Bug fortran/82215] Feature request to better support two pass compiling with gfortran

2021-04-16 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82215 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org |unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/82215] Feature request to better support two pass compiling with gfortran

2019-01-20 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82215 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||patch --- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig

[Bug fortran/82215] Feature request to better support two pass compiling with gfortran

2019-01-13 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82215 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned a

[Bug fortran/82215] Feature request to better support two pass compiling with gfortran

2017-12-09 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82215 --- Comment #7 from Thomas Koenig --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6) > Related to pr42607. > > About the question > > > Also, the -fsyntax-only, etc. option in the first pass does not guarantee > > that > > generated modul

[Bug fortran/82215] Feature request to better support two pass compiling with gfortran

2017-09-16 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82215 --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres --- Related to pr42607. About the question > Also, the -fsyntax-only, etc. option in the first pass does not guarantee > that > generated modules will be identical to those created by the second pass.

[Bug fortran/82215] Feature request to better support two pass compiling with gfortran

2017-09-15 Thread busby1 at llnl dot gov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82215 --- Comment #5 from Lee Busby --- Thank you very much for reading my report, Mr. Koenig. I probably should have pulled out footnote #6 as an explicit comment here, as it comes closest to my own first guess at a "feature request". As you have se

[Bug fortran/82215] Feature request to better support two pass compiling with gfortran

2017-09-15 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82215 --- Comment #4 from Thomas Koenig --- Second thoughts on the parsing *.mod file thing... that would not work very well because compile-time constants would be expanded already. A source-to-source-utility (or compiler flag) would be better.

[Bug fortran/82215] Feature request to better support two pass compiling with gfortran

2017-09-14 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82215 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/82215] Feature request to better support two pass compiling with gfortran

2017-09-14 Thread busby1 at llnl dot gov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82215 --- Comment #2 from Lee Busby --- (In reply to kargl from comment #1) > It sound like you are looking for Fortran 2008's SUBMODULE feature. > See for example > > https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2015/07/07/doctor-fortran-in-we-all- > live-

[Bug fortran/82215] Feature request to better support two pass compiling with gfortran

2017-09-14 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82215 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C