[Bug libfortran/34540] cshift, eoshift, kind=1 and kind=2 arguments...

2008-01-06 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #20 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-06 18:40 --- Fixed with patch to 34387. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug libfortran/34540] cshift, eoshift, kind=1 and kind=2 arguments...

2008-01-06 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #19 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-06 18:35 --- Subject: Bug 34540 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jan 6 18:34:14 2008 New Revision: 131357 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131357 Log: 2008-01-06 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[Bug libfortran/34540] cshift, eoshift, kind=1 and kind=2 arguments...

2008-01-06 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #18 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-06 09:40 --- Posted patch for this PR and PR 34387. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-01/msg00192.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34540

[Bug libfortran/34540] cshift, eoshift, kind=1 and kind=2 arguments...

2008-01-05 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #17 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-05 21:00 --- I think I have a patch for this. Testing -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --

[Bug libfortran/34540] cshift, eoshift, kind=1 and kind=2 arguments...

2007-12-23 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #16 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-23 16:43 --- The test case in comment #9 passes if I revert the code path required by the original test case in pr33317. Using gdb, I see no difference in the incoming dim expression for either case. This implies we need to

[Bug libfortran/34540] cshift, eoshift, kind=1 and kind=2 arguments...

2007-12-22 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #15 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-22 19:22 --- Thomas, hope you don't mind me taking this over. This last bug is a different problem all together. I am hoping we don't have to redesign the implementation. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

[Bug libfortran/34540] cshift, eoshift, kind=1 and kind=2 arguments...

2007-12-22 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #14 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-22 16:39 --- No, I checked the original case for pr33317 and it segfaults on compilation with the change in comment #13. This means the testcase optional_dim_2.f90 is not sufficient. I will fix that along the way here. --

[Bug libfortran/34540] cshift, eoshift, kind=1 and kind=2 arguments...

2007-12-22 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #13 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-22 16:28 --- This is surprising! If I get rid of the hack that was needed before for optional_dim_2.f90 : Index: iresolve.c === --- iresolve.c (revision 13113

[Bug libfortran/34540] cshift, eoshift, kind=1 and kind=2 arguments...

2007-12-22 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-22 16:04 --- This latest issue is not a regression so I changed the summary. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug libfortran/34540] cshift, eoshift, kind=1 and kind=2 arguments...

2007-12-20 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org