--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-25 18:28 ---
Subject: Bug 31494
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jun 25 18:27:59 2007
New Revision: 126000
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126000
Log:
2007-06-25 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-25 18:28 ---
Subject: Bug 32464
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jun 25 18:27:59 2007
New Revision: 126000
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126000
Log:
2007-06-25 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-25 18:28 ---
Fixed on trunk.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-25 18:30 ---
Fixed on trunk.
Thanks for the report, Harald.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-26 09:48 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> I have a fix for this that needs a bit of cleaning up - will submit tonight.
> For some reason, gfc_simplify_repeat denies even the possibility of character
> literal arguments -
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-27 15:56 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> This is related to PR 14771, most likely the parentheses are being ignored.
The parentheses are being ignored - in fact they disappear completely; I
presume that gfc_simplify_expr is
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-28 08:04 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > This is related to PR 14771, most likely the parentheses are being ignored.
> The parentheses are being ignored - in fact they disappear completely;
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-30 13:08 ---
Subject: Bug 32472
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jun 30 13:08:19 2007
New Revision: 126147
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126147
Log:
2007-06-30 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-30 13:08 ---
Subject: Bug 30284
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jun 30 13:08:19 2007
New Revision: 126147
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126147
Log:
2007-06-30 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-30 13:09 ---
Subject: Bug 30284
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jun 30 13:09:14 2007
New Revision: 126148
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126148
Log:
2007-06-30 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-30 13:09 ---
Subject: Bug 32472
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jun 30 13:09:14 2007
New Revision: 126148
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126148
Log:
2007-06-30 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-30 15:11 ---
This, I seem to think is well, fixed on trunk.
Thanks for the report, Tibias.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-03 09:38 ---
> Adding Paul as CC.
>
I'll try to gt to it this afternoon.
Thanks
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32526
--- Comment #15 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-04 08:50 ---
> > >
> > is this still correct ?
>
> Adding Paul, so he can see this question and hopefully answer affirmatively.
>
The patch was posted to the list 0615; whilst functional, i
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-04 08:58 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > Adding Paul as CC.
This is indeed my doing - sorry. The cause is
PR fortran/31494
* match.c (gfc_match_call): If a host associated symbol is not
a subr
--- Comment #18 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-04 09:26 ---
(In reply to comment #17)
> > since it is a regression wrt 4.1 , a fix could go in at 'anytime' ? If it is
> > very invasive, one should fix 4.2 before 4.2.1 though...
>
> one should *not
--- Comment #21 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-04 11:32 ---
> Warsaw, 18.5 C, overcast. Of course, Paul's work on gfortran is more
> important than anything else :-)
>
There is also the question of what I am expected to do over the weekend after
three w
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-04 14:05 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
OK, I now have it understood. The patch in the previous comment is the clue.
The patch for pr31494 was marking generic interfaces as subroutines, thereby
screwing up the mechanism for
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-04 17:44 ---
This is my doing - that makes two this week. *groan*
The regression is caused by the patch for pr31204, which goes back to April.
For some reason that I do not yet see, the variable i in the statement function
is
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-04 20:06 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I read this as: Works in 4.2.x, fails in 4.3, which is also what I get; I
> therefore changed the summary from "4.2 regression" to "4.3 regression".
>
Th
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-05 06:50 ---
Subject: Bug 32613
Author: pault
Date: Thu Jul 5 06:49:54 2007
New Revision: 126354
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126354
Log:
2007-07-05 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-05 06:50 ---
Subject: Bug 32526
Author: pault
Date: Thu Jul 5 06:49:54 2007
New Revision: 126354
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126354
Log:
2007-07-05 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-05 11:01 ---
fixed on trunk - thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-05 11:00 ---
fixed on trunk - thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
IRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32634
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-05 15:24 ---
This fixes it but is, as yet, unregtested:
Index: gcc/fortran/module.c
===
*** gcc/fortran/module.c(revision 126317)
--- gcc/fortran/module.c
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-08 14:51 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> Even with -std=f95 -pedantic no error is given for the following program. NAG
> f95 gives:
Both Lahey and g95 are happy with it.
> "C421 (R424) The length specified f
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-08 19:40 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Not sure if this is same bug or new one.
>
Al,
How do I load a .zip file through Bugzilla, please?
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31609
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-09 04:45 ---
This ICEs as well:
MODULE ksbin1_aux_mod
interface foo
module procedure k
end interface
CONTAINS
FUNCTION j ()
j = 1
ENTRY k ()
k = 2
END FUNCTION j
END MODULE ksbin1_aux_mod
I
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-09 21:33 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
How wierd and wonderful - whilst it is a regression, it is only just; given the
timing of gfc_array_transfer and gfc_simplify_transfer, the latter undid the
former by only a few months or so
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-09 22:40 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Whilst I agree that this is a regession, it is so because an underlying bug is
exposed - in other words, r124541 is perfectly correct.
The following also fails:
program matrix
implicit
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-09 22:42 ---
Oh dear - that's right. I feel a temporary coming on!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-10 05:11 ---
Subject: Bug 32157
Author: pault
Date: Tue Jul 10 05:11:00 2007
New Revision: 126509
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126509
Log:
2007-07-10 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-10 05:11 ---
Subject: Bug 32634
Author: pault
Date: Tue Jul 10 05:11:00 2007
New Revision: 126509
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126509
Log:
2007-07-10 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-10 05:11 ---
Subject: Bug 32689
Author: pault
Date: Tue Jul 10 05:11:00 2007
New Revision: 126509
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126509
Log:
2007-07-10 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-10 05:12 ---
Fixed
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-10 05:13 ---
Fixed on trunk.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-10 05:15 ---
Fixed on trunk
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-10 20:54 ---
My coming character patch fixes this. I'll take it.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-10 20:57 ---
Since i have taken on this stuff - actually the kludge has now gone in the
latest incarnation of the character patch - one more to go!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-12 04:58 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> No error up to and including r126496. That leaves only Paul's patch ...
>
Daniel,
Could you please revert r126496 and re-open the PR? - I can do nothing about it
for 10 d
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-12 06:22 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Daniel,
Hmmm! Cancel that - I'll have a slot this evening where I can either fix it or
revert it myself. Just leave it to me but, I'll let you know if I am unable to
do the busin
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-12 20:05 ---
Subject: Bug 32727
Author: pault
Date: Thu Jul 12 20:04:59 2007
New Revision: 126600
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126600
Log:
2007-07-12 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-12 20:05 ---
Subject: Bug 32634
Author: pault
Date: Thu Jul 12 20:04:59 2007
New Revision: 126600
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126600
Log:
2007-07-12 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-12 20:24 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> From the error message this seems to be a duplicate of 32727.
> Note that the patch (for PR32634) has been reverted and therefore SPEC should
> not fail anymore.
> Thanks fo
--- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-12 20:26 ---
Thanks for the very prompt report.
I would use your cp2k testcase but it does not compile on Cygwin - it runs out
of memory during compilation. When I have a moment, I'll break itup.
Fixed on trunk
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-12 20:27 ---
Fixed... again, I hope.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-13 13:47 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> struct a a.0;
> struct array1_int4 parm.2;
> parm.2.dim[0].ubound = 3;
> a.0.i = (struct array1_int4) parm.2; /* ubound == 3 */
> a.0.
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-13 09:50 ---
This is a two-in-oner; as well as the deallocation, this is broken:
$ cat pr32665.f90
TYPE :: x
INTEGER, ALLOCATABLE :: a(:)
END TYPE
TYPE(x) :: a, b
call foo
b = x((/ (a%a), 4 /))
print *, "foo
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-13 13:48 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Paul, please have a look at PR31320 as well.
> The issue described there is at least very close to your observation.
(In reply to comment #3)
> Paul, please have a look at PR3132
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-06 23:09
---
(In reply to comment #0)
This is incorrect code, which should generate an error, rather than an ICE.
As ifort9.0 puts it:
fortcom: Error: ../pr21986.f90, line 11: This procedure cannot be PUBLIC since
it
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-07 16:09
---
(In reply to comment #16)
> Since number 2 is already reported, we only have 3 and 6 left:
I have a patch for 3 and will try to sort out 6 (+pr21986) as soon as I have a
moment.
--
http://gcc.gnu.
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-11 16:28
---
(In reply to comment #22)
A thoroughly reduced testcase is:
module foo
INTEGER :: i
end module foo
module bar
contains
subroutine sub(j)
use foo
integer, dimension(i) :: j !change dimension to
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-18 04:56
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> *** Bug 21300 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Andrew,
These two seem to have fixed themselves. Would you like me to submit a
testcase?
Paul T
--
h
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-18 14:04
---
Fixed on mainline and 4.02
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-09/msg00068.html contains a remark that an
issue raised by Steven Bosscher had been resolved. I had forgotten that I
raised this PR about it
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-26 19:24
---
Patch posted on fortran list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-09/msg00400.html
Paul T
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23446
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-26 19:28
---
> I have a patch for 3 and will try to sort out 6 (+pr21986) as soon as I have a
> moment.
Both sorted in
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-09/msg00438.html
Paul T
--
Bug 16404 depends on bug
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-26 19:29
---
Sorted in:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-09/msg00438.html
Paul T
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20835
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-26 19:30
---
This will be resolved by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-09/msg00438.html
Paul T
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20890
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-26 19:31
---
This will be resolved by:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-09/msg00438.html
Paul T
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20899
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-26 19:32
---
This is resolved by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-09/msg00438.html
Paul T
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20900
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-26 19:33
---
This is resolved by
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-09/msg00438.html
Paul T
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20901
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-26 19:34
---
This is resolved by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-09/msg00438.html
Paul T
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20902
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-26 19:35
---
This is resolved by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-09/msg00438.html
Paul T
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20903
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-26 19:37
---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This is resolved by
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-09/msg00438.html
>
> Paul T
PS The testcase checks the character sequence, rather than default character
ponent: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24092
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-28 18:59
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> This is resolved by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-09/msg00438.html
>
> Paul T
>
Bull twaddle! This is wrong, whoever you are.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
tus: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24158
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-01 09:40
---
Sorry, I meant to say that the recursiveness is not being resolved.
I have a fix in the pipeline.
--
What|Removed |Added
sion: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24276
Summary: Regression: ICE when MERGE is used with character args
in a PRINT/WRITE statement
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24311
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-12 07:30 ---
Fixed on mainline and 4.0.
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #21 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-13 04:48 ---
I have posted another, better patch to the list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-10/msg00271.html
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18022
andle scalar sources.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24384
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-17 20:58 ---
Thank you Salvatore and Andrew.
The proposed patch is about to be posted on the fortran and gcc-patches list.
I just have a couple more minutes of testing other, completely off-the-wall
cases before submitting
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-19 05:35 ---
Corrected on both head and 4.0
Note that I have not added a testcase but did check that the segfault no longer
happens.
Paul T
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-20 19:08 ---
> This one is scary. I add Paul T to the Cc list (since he's familiar with
> namelist). As far as I can tell, this looks like a purely library-side problem
> (the code emitted by the front-end looks
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-23 15:08 ---
Fixed in mainline.
Unfortunately, this cannot be fixed in 4.0 because the necessary patches to
permit character valued intriniscs were never implemented.
Paul T
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-23 15:08 ---
Fixed in mainline.
Unfortunately, this cannot be fixed in 4.0 because the necessary patches to
permit character valued intriniscs were never implemented.
Paul T
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #24 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-23 16:25 ---
Fixed on mainline and 4.0
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-24 15:58 ---
Thanks FX. Jerry DeLisle is having a stab at this so I have put him on the cc
list.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-24 21:13 ---
Fixed on mainline and 4.03.
The problem turned out to be that saved_string was not being freed after
character reads. This is done within read_ for every type other than
character, which is why it was missed. Have
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-26 07:57 ---
Fixed on mainline and 4.03
Farewell cvs!
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-26 19:44 ---
This was fixed on mainline and 4.0
The testcase now gives:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mytests]# /gcc-clean/bin/gfortran -c pr21986.f90
In file pr21986.f90:4
public:: dummysub ! comment out, lose the bug
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-01 05:53 ---
Subject: Bug 21565
Author: pault
Date: Tue Nov 1 05:53:29 2005
New Revision: 106317
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=106317
Log:
2005-11-01 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-01 05:53 ---
Subject: Bug 18737
Author: pault
Date: Tue Nov 1 05:53:29 2005
New Revision: 106317
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=106317
Log:
2005-11-01 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-01 05:53 ---
Subject: Bug 14994
Author: pault
Date: Tue Nov 1 05:53:29 2005
New Revision: 106317
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=106317
Log:
2005-11-01 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-01 12:15 ---
Subject: Bug 21565
Author: pault
Date: Tue Nov 1 12:15:07 2005
New Revision: 106326
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=106326
Log:
2005-11-01 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-01 12:15 ---
Subject: Bug 14994
Author: pault
Date: Tue Nov 1 12:15:07 2005
New Revision: 106326
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=106326
Log:
2005-11-01 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-01 12:15 ---
Subject: Bug 18737
Author: pault
Date: Tue Nov 1 12:15:07 2005
New Revision: 106326
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=106326
Log:
2005-11-01 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-01 13:03 ---
Fixed on mainline and 4.0
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-01 13:04 ---
Fixed on mainline and 4.0
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-08 14:06 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> For reference, this was Paul's message to the list:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-12/msg00164.html
>
Dear Joost,
This was followed by http://gcc.gnu.org/m
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-08 17:25 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > This was followed by http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2009-12/msg00166.html
>
> I have just retested your patch on a clean tree to Dominique&#x
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-08 18:19 ---
Please excuse the lack of a diff - I was using a snap shot to work on this PR.
This fixes the problem but I do not know if it regtests; however, I believe it
to be good. If somebody wants to take it to completion
--- Comment #17 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-13 12:43 ---
Subject: Bug 41113
Author: pault
Date: Sat Feb 13 12:42:39 2010
New Revision: 156749
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156749
Log:
2010-02-13 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/41113
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-13 12:43 ---
Subject: Bug 41117
Author: pault
Date: Sat Feb 13 12:42:39 2010
New Revision: 156749
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156749
Log:
2010-02-13 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/41113
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-14 09:47 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> mv 'Build' to 'CC' , Paul, please see previous comment.
>
Joost,
You scared the life out of me when you said that it failed! I had to exclude
dummies but I no
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-14 17:21 ---
Yes indeed! Section 5.4 of F2003 removes most of the restrictions for
namelist-group-objects. Ifort 11.1 does the right thing with your testcase.
Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #18 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-14 19:25 ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> Created an attachment (id=19824)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19824&action=view) [edit]
> Second test giving a segmentation fault with the patch appli
1901 - 2000 of 3045 matches
Mail list logo
