--- Comment #10 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-27 09:11
---
Closing (fixed).
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Stat
--- Comment #9 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-07 14:37 ---
> Does this need a 4.4 backport? I'm inclined to think not.
Good question. As it is no regression, backporting is not required; it is a
wrong-code bug, but strides are rather special. Thus for me either is OK -
back
--- Comment #8 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-07 14:24 ---
Does this need a 4.4 backport? I'm inclined to think not.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40187
--- Comment #7 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-30 13:17 ---
Subject: Bug 40187
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat May 30 13:17:14 2009
New Revision: 148002
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=148002
Log:
2009-05-30 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/37577
--- Comment #6 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-27 05:27 ---
Subject: Bug 40187
Author: tkoenig
Date: Wed May 27 05:27:31 2009
New Revision: 147894
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=147894
Log:
2009-05-27 Thomas Koenig
PR libfortran/40187
--- Comment #5 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-19 17:18 ---
Since I'm working in this area anyway, I might as well take this.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #4 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-19 17:17 ---
Created an attachment (id=17894)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17894&action=view)
Driver for failing test case (identical to c_f_pointer_shape_tests_2_driver.c)
$ gfortran c_f_pointer_shape_tes
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-19 17:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=17893)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17893&action=view)
Failing test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40187
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-19 05:06 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Can you attach a working example? I failed to apply your patch and figure out
> which diffed file is what.
>
Hi Tobias,
It's a reversed diff!
Hi Thomas,
Works for me on FC9/x86_64 - what
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-05-18 21:20 ---
Can you attach a working example? I failed to apply your patch and figure out
which diffed file is what.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40187
10 matches
Mail list logo