--
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Wrong code in array |[4.0 only] Wrong code in
|constructor |array constructor
Target Milestone|
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-07
09:14 ---
This appears to be fixed now in mainline:
$ cat complex-parts.c
#include
#include
int main()
{
float cr,ci;
float complex c;
foo(&cr,&ci);
c = cr+I*ci;
return crealf(c)+cim
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-07
22:04 ---
This should be gone now on mainline.
Waiting for 4.0 to reopen.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-07
22:16 ---
g77 gets this right.
--
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-09
14:39 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> Andrew, is this sufficient to close this PR? The behavior of
> ftruncate() on /dev/null appears to be system dependent.
Being able to read back from /dev/null is still
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-10
22:18 ---
The comments in fd_truncate (line 505 ff. in unix.c) read
if (lseek (s->fd, s->logical_offset, SEEK_SET) == -1)
return FAILURE;
/* non-seekable files, like terminals and fifo's fai
: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC host triplet: ia64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22436
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22437
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-12
20:40 ---
Commit for 4.1 here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2005-07/msg00486.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21593
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-14
07:12 ---
We are assuming at most three digits for the exponent,
which isn't true for a kind=10 real. This is both in
unformatted and formatted output.
$ cat tiny2.f90
program main
real(kind=10) a
a = t
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-14
21:19 ---
Fixed in 4.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-14
21:20 ---
Fixed in 4.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--
Bug 21594 depends on bug 22142, which changed state.
Bug 22142 Summary: [4.0 only] eoshift: boundary not filled in correctly
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22142
What|Old Value |New Value
-
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-14
21:21 ---
Fixed in 4.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--
Bug 21594 depends on bug 22144, which changed state.
Bug 22144 Summary: [4.0 only] eoshift1, eoshift3, cshift1 lack memory allocation
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22144
What|Old Value |New Value
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22495
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-15
20:25 ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> This is one bad nasty ugly bug.
Yep.
This "works" (for small values of "works") if the IMPLICIT NONE
is omitted.
The problem appears to be that resolv
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-15
20:48 ---
Fixed in 4.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-15
20:48 ---
Fixed in 4.0.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18857
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-15
20:50 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
90 testsuite failure
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-16
18:59 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> What target is this on? x86_64-pc-linux-gnu?
i686-pc-linux-gnu.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22509
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
OtherBugsDependingO 19276
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||22518
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19276
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-17
19:12 ---
Fixed in 4.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-17
19:45 ---
I don't think the timing issue is valid.
Look at these benchmarks:
The first one simulates copying 12-byte values to 10-bit values,
the second one a compact memcpy of a larger field.
$ cat foo.c
#in
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-18
14:35 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> ultimately, things have to be written by a system call, and a system call is
> expensive. (One system call per array element is out of the question.)
With the c
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-18
17:41 ---
Fixed in 4.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-19
07:30 ---
This is probably invalid code.
ifort rejects this with
fortcom: Error: elem-char.f90, line 5: A CHARACTER function name must not be
declared with an asterisk type-param-value (i.e., (LEN=*)) if the
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-19
07:57 ---
No elemental function call necessary, it seems. (The *
is probably invalid for this).
Here is another case which exhibits the same behavior:
$ cat clen.f90
program main
implicit none
character(len=2
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-19
18:31 ---
Fixed in 4.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-22
08:34 ---
Updated summary to reflect the bug more accurately.
--
What|Removed |Added
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22607
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-22
11:30 ---
Confirmed.
We need to reject dummy arguments if
- they are of a derived type
- the derived type is declared in that subroutine
- they aren't sequence types.
--
What|Re
d-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: middle-end
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22619
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-22
20:22 ---
I forget:
$ gfortran -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc-4.1/configure --prefix=/home/ig25
--enable-languages=c,f95
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.1.0 20050722
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-23
06:31 ---
I don't experience the libgfortran failure on i686-pc-linux-gnu.
The latest ChangeLog entry for the gcc subdirectory on my machine is:
2005-07-22 Mark Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-23
07:06 ---
The dump of the .optimzed contains a lot of statements like
Invalid sum of incoming frequencies 2731, should be 9500
:;
if (ABS_EXPR > 9.9974737875163555145263671875e-6) goto ; else goto ;
Inva
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-26
21:24 ---
Also seen on http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-07/msg01377.html
and http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-07/msg01002.html (for
Cygwin).
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23092
nedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23151
ormal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23152
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05
20:17 ---
At least it's caught at runtime with -fbounds-check:
$ gfortran -fbounds-check conform.f90
$ ./a.out
Fortran runtime error: Array bound mismatch
I agree that a compile-time check would be b
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-09
20:00 ---
stop_numeric, stop_string and runtime_error have been fixed.
abort requires some more work.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17758
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-10
20:32 ---
Fixed in mainline and 4.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--
Bug 21594 depends on bug 22143, which changed state.
Bug 22143 Summary: missing kinds 1 and 2 for eoshift and cshift
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22143
What|Old Value |New Value
-
686
(maybe Athlon-xp)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: target
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig a
version for internal write
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoeni
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12
20:22 ---
$ gcc -g -ffast-math hello.c
$ gdb ./a.out
GNU gdb 6.3-debian
Copyright 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
GDB is free software, covered by the GNU General Public License, and you are
welcome to change it
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12
20:37 ---
(gdb) r
Starting program: /home/ig25/Krempel/a.out
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x08048469 in set_fast_math ()
at ../../gcc-4.1/gcc/config/i386/crtfastmath.c:70
70
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12
21:35 ---
The NAG source isn't generally available. Can you provide a small
test that exposes the bug?
Also, it would be helpful if you could run the f951 binary under gdb,
compile the source and provie a back
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12
21:47 ---
This is fixed on mainline and on 4.0.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-12
22:29 ---
This also segfaults (see below).
I am also seeing the gfortran testsuite failure prompted by this
problem on http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2005-08/msg00694.html
and http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc
duct: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-13
11:47 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 23373 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-13
11:47 ---
*** Bug 23374 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-08-
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-13
11:54 ---
This has been fixed with Paul T's patch for generic name resolution.
--
What|Removed |
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23375
--
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO||23379
nThis||
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23364
l write
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||23379
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19274
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-13
21:25 ---
Sorry, wrong bug number.
--
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|19274
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-14
21:39 ---
If HAVE_MMAP is undefined, then the test case gets to
"should not get here", so this is buggy as well.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23321
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-15
22:12 ---
Proposed fix:
Index: transfer.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/gcc/libgfortran/io/transfer.c,v
retrieving revision 1.52
diff -c -p -r1.52 transfer.c
portedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: ia64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23419
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23420
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-16
19:52 ---
We need to settle what kind of disk image we want for real(kind=10)
before resolving this for complex.
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-16
20:12 ---
Confirmed.
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu
riority: P2
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23429
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-16
21:39 ---
Fixed in 4.0 and mainline. Closing.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23452
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-22
05:57 ---
My understanding is that this is not Fortran-specific, but
that Fortran happens to have a test case that exposes this
bug. Has anybody constructed a C test case?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23598
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org |org
URL|
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-29
20:56 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-21 18:31 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Sorry, Steve - my mistake.
>
> The original message should have been:
>
> To illustrate this with a simple example:
>
> DO I = M1, M2, M3
>B(I) = A(I)
&g
--- Comment #6 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-21 23:07 ---
Created an attachment (id=19076)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19076&action=view)
proposed patch
This patch generates
D.1336 = m1;
D.1337 = m2;
D.1338 = m3;
i = D.1336;
--- Comment #8 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-21 23:42 ---
Subject: Re: Weird translation of DO loops
On Sat, 2009-11-21 at 23:23 +, rguenther at suse dot de wrote:
> That's better.
Not yet correct, though, this causes regressions for
prog
--- Comment #11 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-23 21:48
---
Created an attachment (id=19104)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19104&action=view)
another proposed patch
Here's another proposed patch, but there is a problem with it.
If we c
--- Comment #13 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-26 21:56
---
Created an attachment (id=19159)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19159&action=view)
patch that implements the multiplication idea
This generates
if (D.1339 > 0)
{
--- Comment #15 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-26 23:43
---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Looks much better than the current situation. Is there a valid
> reason for the character(kind=4) casts? I would have thought
> that this should be a integer(kind=4).
The
--- Comment #19 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-28 15:16
---
(In reply to comment #18)
> Well, in that case you can as well rely on twos-complement
> arithmetic and avoid all the overflow issues?
This is difficult without if statements or MAX_EXPR and MIN_EXPR,
bec
--- Comment #20 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 07:31
---
Created an attachment (id=19182)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19182&action=view)
Patch that works for unrolling
It also passes do_3.F90.
I'll submit just in time for meeting
--- Comment #22 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 19:15
---
(In reply to comment #21)
> the "sign" for unsigned steps is always 1, you don't seem to account
> for unsignedness?
(Un)fortunately, there are no unsigned varaibles in Fortran.
> Note t
--- Comment #24 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 20:35
---
Subject: Bug 42131
Author: tkoenig
Date: Mon Nov 30 20:35:41 2009
New Revision: 154839
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154839
Log:
2009-11-30 Thomas Koenig
PR fortr
--- Comment #25 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-30 21:01
---
Fixed on trunk. Closing.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
at gcc dot gnu dot org
BugsThisDependsOn: 41478
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42268
--- Comment #1 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 20:43 ---
See
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41478#c11
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 19:22 ---
Janus, I just re-checked the patch from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41478#c12
and found that that is all that's needed.
OK to commit to trunk and, after a few days, to 4.4 with the
testcase
--- Comment #14 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 20:33
---
The problem is with the allocatable components for
intrinsics, at least.
This has the same problem:
program main
type :: container_t
integer, dimension(:), allocatable :: entry
end type container_t
type
--- Comment #15 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 20:36
---
Very probably a dup of PR 40850.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41478
--- Comment #16 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-04 21:03
---
We get this right on assignment, so it is probably "just" a matter
of copying over the logic from there.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41478
--- Comment #6 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-05 18:28 ---
$ cat huhu.f90
CHARACTER (kind=4,len=*) MY_STRING4(1:3), my_string_s4
PARAMETER ( MY_STRING4 = (/ "A" , "B", "C" /) )
end
$ gfortran huhu.f90
huhu.f90:1.54:
CHARACTER (kind=4,len=*)
--- Comment #30 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-05 21:53
---
(In reply to comment #29)
> Probably fixed by the commit of PR 40643 comment 7
>
> Author: jakub
> Date: Fri Jul 24 07:57:13 2009
> New Revision: 150041
>
> URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?
--- Comment #8 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-05 21:54 ---
As far as I can see, this is fixed.
Closing.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-05 22:14 ---
Reduced test case, from c2.f90:
module m_sort
implicit none
type, abstract :: sort_t
contains
procedure(gt_cmp), deferred :: gt_cmp
end type sort_t
contains
subroutine bsort(a)
class(sort_t
--- Comment #36 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-15 07:09
---
If it is any help, code which traps for a do loop is illegal Fortran,
so the compiler may do anything in this case anyway.
Is there a function like
--- Comment #5 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-16 17:27 ---
A test case is still required.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
801 - 900 of 1518 matches
Mail list logo
