On Wed, Apr 20, 2022, 16:27 Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> Hi Fritz,
>
> Am 20.04.22 um 20:03 schrieb Fritz Reese via Fortran:
> > See the bug report at gcc dot gnu dot org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105310 .
>
> OK if you add a/the testcase.
..
>
> As this affects all branches, you may backport the patch
See the bug report at gcc dot gnu dot org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105310 .
This code was originally authored by me and the fix is trivial, so I
intend to commit the attached patch in the next few days if there is
no dissent.
The bug is caused by gfc_conv_union_initializer in
gcc/fortran/trans-e
This patch here is a follow-on to Jakub's in his message "[PATCH]
libgfortran: Provide some further math library fallbacks [PR94694]" at
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-April/054252.html.
I think this should be committed along with Jakub's patch in response
to PRs 94586 and 94694. Thoug
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 1:25 PM Thomas Koenig via Fortran
wrote:
>
> Hello world,
>
> after finding myself debug a PR where showing all the attributes
> of a symbol would have helped enormously (which I realized only
> afterwards), I went ahead and added most of the flags to show_attr,
> in the ho
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 10:33 AM Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> Hi Fritz,
>
> > First, it appears if simplify_bound_dim returns &gfc_bad_expr (and a
> > div/0 occurs) then this code will free &gfc_bad_expr. I'm not sure
> > whether or not that can actually occur, but it is certainly incorrect,
> > since
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 7:53 AM Thomas Koenig via Fortran
wrote:
>
> Hello world,
>
> this patch fixes PR PR93500. One part of it is due to
> what Steve wrote in the patch (returning from resolutions when both
> operands are NULL), but that still left a nonsensical error.
> Returning &gfc_bad_exp
On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 1:47 PM Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> Hi Fritz,
>
> > While you're touching the code anyway, how would you feel about
> > replacing the nearby "goto done"s with a chain of "else if"? There's
> > really no reason I can see for goto here, since the block following
> > the conditio
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 7:54 AM Linus König wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> the PR has just recently been committed. Paul gave his offline approval.
> I only realized recently, that the NULL pointer check can actually be
> ommitted if the check is moved in the code. In the commit however, it is
> still rig
> Yes. Looking back at the code, I think it can also be cleaned up
> a little - turning the error to warnings is only needed on that
> particular branch, and resetting it to the default can also
> happen there, and at the target of a goto statement.
>
> So, here's an updated patch. OK for trunk?
On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 10:20 AM Thomas Koenig via Fortran
wrote:
>
> Hello world,
>
> the attached patch fixes an ICE on invalid: When the return type of
> a function was misdeclared with a wrong rank, we issued a warning,
> but not an error (unless with -pedantic); later on, an ICE ensued.
>
> N
On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 10:27 AM Linus König wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Here is the patch with some of the null pointer tests removed.
>
> This is regression-tested. ChangeLog and test case are as in
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2020-April/054193.html .
Thanks. Sorry I missed the ChangeLog ent
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 8:27 AM Linus König wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I fixed the style issues. However, omitting the checks for NULL produced
> several regressions in my previous tests.
>
The style looks good. Please share testcases which exhibit the
regressions. They will also need to be included in
g
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 8:14 AM Rainer Orth
wrote:
>
> Hi Fritz,
[...]
> one new testcases comes up as UNRESOLVED everywhere:
>
> +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/asynchronous_5.f03 -O scan-tree-dump-not
> original "volatile.*?ivar_noasync"
> +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/asynchronous_5.f03 -O scan-t
Tobias,
Thanks very much for the review.
On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 5:21 AM Tobias Burnus wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 4/6/20 7:25 PM, Fritz Reese via Fortran wrote:
>
> > The attached patch fixes PR 87923 while also simplifying the code in
> > io.c.
>
> Thanks for the work, which looks great; it is a bit
Andreas, thank you for the report.
Tobias, thank you for the fix.
---
Fritz Reese
On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 12:02 PM Tobias Burnus wrote:
>
> Hi Andreas,
>
> thanks for the report. In principle, it would be helpful to know on
> which target you are running the test case.
>
> However, I assume that
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:47 PM Steve Kargl
wrote:
[...]
> BTW, if you haven't committed the degree trig functions,
> then I think you should to get the fixes in for 10.1.
Roger that.
---
Fritz
On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 2:58 PM Steve Kargl via Fortran
wrote:
>
> This patch fixes the ICE found in PR93686.
>
>
> Index: gcc/fortran/decl.c
> ===
> --- gcc/fortran/decl.c (revision 280157)
> +++ gcc/fortran/decl.c (working copy)
>
All,
The attached patch fixes PR 87923 while also simplifying the code in
io.c. I do say this patch simplifies io.c because it is true. This
patch causes more deletions than insertions to the file -- a rare
sight:
gcc/fortran/io.c | 859 ---
1
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:51 AM Linus König wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm new to gcc and this is my first patch. The idea is not have another
> resolution of a pointer if an error has occurred previously. I hope this
> meets all the criteria for a patch. In case anything is missing or
> wrong, I'm ope
Tobias,
Thank you for the information. I didn't think about translations. I'll
post a new version and commit shortly.
Cheers,
Fritz
On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 3:50 AM Tobias Burnus wrote:
>
> In principle, I like the patch. However, I think one should
> replace
>
> gfc_error ("Attribute at %L is n
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 1:19 PM Fritz Reese wrote:
[...]
> is still good. Is this OK to commit to trunk and for backport? I'd
> like to port as far back as 7.
I realized 7 branch is closed. I would backport to 8.
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> 2020-04-01 Fritz Reese
>
>PR fortran/85982
>
This simple patch was submitted some time ago (over 1 year), but got
lost without review. I have lately rebased and tested, and the patch
is still good. Is this OK to commit to trunk and for backport? I'd
like to port as far back as 7.
---
Fritz Reese
gcc/ChangeLog:
2020-04-01 Fritz Reese
Unfortunately the mailing list stripped off this attachment so we do
not have a chance to review. As attachments appear to be working
lately, please resubmit this patch.
Fritz
On Sun, Mar 8, 2020 at 8:58 AM Paul Richard Thomas
wrote:
>
> This is yet another case, where a deferred character lengt
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 7:36 PM Fritz Reese wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 6:18 PM Steve Kargl
> wrote:
> [...]
> > TL;DR version.
> >
> > Fix the simplification and handling of the degree trigonometric functions.
> > This includes fixing a number of ICEs. See PR 93871.
>
> An updated ver
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 4:53 PM Tobias Burnus wrote:
>
> Hi Fritz,
>
> On 3/30/20 10:20 PM, Fritz Reese via Fortran wrote:
>
> >>> * All included files need dependency; I do not quickly
> >>>see whether that' the case.
>
> If one looks at the build, the dependency is automatically
> obtained a
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 12:37 PM Steve Kargl
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 08:10:38AM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> > Two remarks:
> >
> > * As the file trigd_lib.inc is shared between libgfortran
> > and gcc/fortran, I wonder whether it should be placed
> > under include/ (under the GCC
On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 6:18 PM Steve Kargl
wrote:
[...]
> TL;DR version.
>
> Fix the simplification and handling of the degree trigonometric functions.
> This includes fixing a number of ICEs. See PR 93871.
An updated version of the patch is attached. Regression tests (and new
test cases) ar
27 matches
Mail list logo
