On Sun, Jul 13, 2025 at 10:59:32AM +0200, Mikael Morin wrote:
>
> Regression tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
> OK for master?
>
Yes, with one observation below.
> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-array.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-array.cc
> index 1561936daf1..af62e17442b 100644
> --- a/gcc/fortran/tran
On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 08:50:08AM +0200, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
>
> why shall the testcase be invalid?
See the 2nd bullet in Fortran 2023, 9.7.1.3 Allocation
of allocatable variables.
An allocatable variable has a status of "unallocated"
if it is not allocated.
...
An allocata
On Mon, Jul 07, 2025 at 08:53:16PM +0200, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> Andre,
>
> I still don't get it, and the present version made it worse for me...
>
> So let's see what I was thinking. There are the following types of
> functions:
>
> (0) impure, non-elemental functions, which likely have side-e
On Sun, Jul 06, 2025 at 09:09:53PM +0800, Yuao Ma wrote:
> Hi Tobias,
>
> On 7/6/2025 6:34 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> > As that commit is from 2020 and 2.69 in from 2012, it seems as if your
> > autoconf is too new. Can you re-check that the right version is at the
> > beginning of the PATH?
> >
On Sun, Jul 06, 2025 at 08:43:06AM +0800, Yuao Ma wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> On 7/6/2025 12:25 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 05, 2025 at 05:20:02PM +0800, Yuao Ma wrote:
> > > diff --git a/libgfortran/configure b/libgfortran/configure
> > > index 9898a94a37
Paul,
Either resolve.cc has sufficiently evolved since you
submitted your patch or the patch is somehow mangled.
When I apply it to my tree for resolve.cc, I see
Hunk #1 succeeded at 3919.
Hunk #2 succeeded at 4223.
Hunk #3 succeeded at 7940 (offset -28 lines).
Hunk #4 succeeded at 8068 (offset
On Sat, Jul 05, 2025 at 05:20:02PM +0800, Yuao Ma wrote:
>
> diff --git a/libgfortran/configure b/libgfortran/configure
> index 9898a94a372..971f1e9df5e 100755
> --- a/libgfortran/configure
> +++ b/libgfortran/configure
> @@ -16413,7 +16413,7 @@ else
> We can't simply define LARGE_OFF_T to b
On Thu, Jul 03, 2025 at 10:12:52PM +0200, Mikael Morin wrote:
> From: Mikael Morin
>
> Regression-tested on aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu.
> OK for master?
>
Yes. Almost looks obvious once someone finds and fixes the issue.
Thanks for the patch.
--
Steve
On Thu, Jul 03, 2025 at 02:43:43PM +0200, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 3 Jul 2025, Yuao Ma wrote:
>
> > This patch adds the required function for Fortran trigonometric functions to
> > work with glibc versions prior to 2.26. It's based on glibc source commit
> > 632d895f3e5d98162f77b9
On Thu, Jul 03, 2025 at 12:56:24AM +0800, Yuao Ma wrote:
>
> This patch adds the required function for Fortran trigonometric functions to
> work with glibc versions prior to 2.26. It's based on glibc source commit
> 632d895f3e5d98162f77b9c3c1da4ec19968b671.
>
> I've built it successfully on my en
On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 04:36:38AM -0700, Damian Rouson wrote:
> git branch
> gir checkout
> git add
> git commit
> git rebase
> git push
>
> It’s time to move beyond emailing patches! (Please.)
I don't use git other than 'git clone', 'git reset --hard',
and 'git diff'. If gfortran development
Andre,
I've never built gcc for aarch64-freebsd. I was going to
suggest doing the full bootstrap, but that seems to be too
slow. On amd64, I use
../gcc/configure --prefix=$WDIR \
--enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto \
--enable-bootstrap \
--disable-nls \
--disable-libssp \
--disa
On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 06:54:53PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 03:30:21PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 11:07:31AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 10:35:39AM -0700,
Yet, another head scratcher.
../../../gcc/libgfortran/caf/shmem/supervisor.c:235:27: error: 'environ'
undeclared (first use in this function)
235 | for (char **e = environ; *e; ++e, ++n)
| ^~~
I see 'extern char **environ;' in shmem.c. Is this sup
On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 07:06:57PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 06:54:53PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >
> > /usr/local/bin/ld: cannot find -lcaf_shmem: No such file or directory
> > collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
> > compiler exited
On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 06:54:53PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> /usr/local/bin/ld: cannot find -lcaf_shmem: No such file or directory
> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
> compiler exited with status 1
>
> The freshly built gfortran cannot find the libcaf_shmem.a.
On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 03:30:21PM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 11:07:31AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 10:35:39AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > >
> > > === gfortran Summary ===
> > >
> &g
On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 11:07:31AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 10:35:39AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >
> > === gfortran Summary ===
> >
> > # of expected passes73149
> > # of unexpected failures522
I
On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 08:36:38PM +0200, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
>
> I would do git am pr88076_v1_1.patch or patch -p1 each of the patch files. Then they go where they ought to be.
Thanks. I needed -p1 for v1_5 and v1_6.
> Pro tip: create a new branch before doing the git am, then you can ju
On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 10:35:39AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> Just applied the 6 patch (with the update part 5). I'm
> seeing a significant increase in the number of failures
> in 'make check-fortran' testing.
>
Just re-applied your patches in the top-level g
On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 10:35:39AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> === gfortran Summary ===
>
> # of expected passes73149
> # of unexpected failures522
> # of expected failures 343
> # of unresolved testcases 78
>
On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 10:15:01AM +0200, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
>
> I deem this library fit for educational and research use,
> where small to medium sized problems are researched. I do
> not expect it to support a long term running application,
> because is does not join adjacent blocks in th
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 03:09:33PM +0200, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
>
> this series of patches (six in total) adds a new coarray backend library to
> libgfortran. The library uses shared memory and processes to implement
> running multiple images on the same node. The work is based on work starte
Thanks for cleaning up gfortran code. I was curious about
what the GNU Coding Standard said about this case, but it
does not consider initialization of subobjects. I did find
5.3 Clean Use of C Constructs
...
Don't make the program ugly just to placate static
analysis tools such as l
On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 04:09:26PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When compiling fortran/match.cc, clang emits a warning
>
> fortran/match.cc:5301:7: warning: variable 'p' is used uninitialized
> whenever 'if' condition is true [-Wsometimes-uninitialized]
>
> which looks accurate, so t
test. There will be bugs, because nobody is perfect.
>
> @Steve caf_shmem does not use MPI. It is a shared memory, single node, multi
> process approach. Just to prevent any misunderstanding.
>
> Thanks for all the testing.
>
> Regards,
> Andre
>
> On Tue, 24
On Tue, Jun 24, 2025 at 09:00:46PM +0200, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> here's an obvious fix for a recent regression: substring offset
> calculations used a wrong type that crashed in gimplification.
> Andre basically OK'ed it in the PR, but here it is nevertheless.
>
> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-g
Damian,
I submitted a patch a long time ago to make -fcoarray=single the
default behavior. The patch made -fcoarray=none a NOP. With
inclusion of a shmem implementation of the runtime parts, this
might be the way to go. I'll leave that decision to Andre, Thomas,
and Nicolas.
I believe that the
On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 12:05:34PM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 9:41 PM Harald Anlauf wrote:
> >
> > Am 16.06.25 um 02:18 schrieb Steve Kargl:
> > > Harald,
> > >
> > > I did a quick glance at the patch and did not see anything
would overflow assignment to integer(kind=4), and does not
> return ERANGE as in v1 of this patch. There is no need to modify
> the existing testcasese stat_{1,2}.f90.
>
> Cheers,
> Harald
>
> Am 12.06.25 um 22:12 schrieb Harald Anlauf:
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > On 6
On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 10:18:37PM +0200, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> the attached patch is a first attempt to fix some issues with the GNU
> intrinsics STAT/LSTAT/FSTAT which are g77 heritage. This patch is
> preparatory for dealing with the issue reported in PR82480 in that
> the default version o
On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 02:34:09PM +0200, FX Coudert wrote:
>
> In commit 5e918a4db9e4a5bdbeafec6881fa8b22a55d3789, regenerated files
> were not included in the commit as they should have been. Therefore, a
> whitespace fix was not propagated. Sync generated files now, as obtained
> from a run wit
On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 07:37:49PM +0200, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> here's a patch fixing the handling of parameter inquiries of
> constant complex arrays. It profits from previous fixes for
> inquiries of substrings and essentially adds only the simplification
> of %re/%im applies to complex arra
On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 08:11:05AM -0700, Jerry D wrote:
> The attached patch is simple and self explanatory in the git log entry.
>
> Regression tested on X86_64-linux-gnu.
>
> OK for trunk?
>
Yes, with one question.
> commit 845768cbead03f76265e491bcf5ea6de7020ff39
> Author: Jerry DeLisle
>
On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 02:17:46PM +, Yuao Ma wrote:
>
> I've reverted the recent format changes, as three reviewers indicated they
> caused more harm than good.
>
Thank you.
> Are there any functional problems I need to address?
I did not see any additional functional issues. Patch is
OK
On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 09:30:59AM +, Yuao Ma wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> > I looked at the patch in a bit more detail, and
> > I am not thrilled with large-scale whitespace
> > changes mingled with functional changes. It makes
> > the patch harder to read and review.
>
> I'm not sure which file y
On Sun, May 25, 2025 at 04:56:48AM +, Yuao Ma wrote:
>
> Thanks for your review! I've updated the patch.
>
> > this range_check() is unneeded.
>
> Done.
>
> > As a side note, the error message is slightly misleading
> > (although it will not be issued). Technically, x = -1 or 1
> > are all
Apologies for late a late reply. A quick skim of the code
suggests that you can eliminate some of the range_check()
calls in the simplifications. For example, you have
+gfc_expr *
+gfc_simplify_acospi (gfc_expr *x)
+{
+ gfc_expr *result;
+
+ if (x->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT)
+return NULL;
On Tue, May 06, 2025 at 07:43:41PM +0200, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> the new logic misses the following bad code:
>
> print *, c_associated(c_loc(val), 42)
>
> This now ICEs here.
>
> I suggest to not 'return true' too early before all arguments
> have been checked.
>
Good catch, Harald. We
On Mon, May 05, 2025 at 08:30:09PM -0700, Jerry D wrote:
> Attached patch fixes this by checking for BT_VOID and EXPR_FUNCTION.
>
> Thank you for guidance from Steve in the PR and Vincent for
> identifying the problem.
>
> Two test case files added to the testsuite.
>
> Regression tested on x86_
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 09:40:38PM +0100, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> Regression-tested. Again no test case because I don't know
> how. During testing, I also found that vtabs were dumped,
> this is also corrected.
>
> OK for trunk?
Thanks for working on this, but ...
>
> /* This section deals
On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 11:08:58PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> the attached patch addresses an actually very long-standing issue
> with bogus bounds checks for components of nested derived types in
> assignments when an intermediate level has the POINTER attribute
> instead of the ALLOCATABLE
On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 10:49:08PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> Thanks for the speedy review!
>
It was a bit easier than normal. After I submitted
the PR, I started to poke around in fortran/resolve.cc
to see if I could deal with the issue. I saw that you
grab the PR last night, and left yo
On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 01:52:06PM +0100, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> the attached patch fixes an ICE regresseion where undo state was not
> handled properly when generating formal from actual arguments, which
> occurred under certain conditions with the newly introduced
> -Wexternal-argument-mismatc
On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 10:04:08PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> this patch fixes an interesting regression that prevented substring
> bounds checks from being generated if the substring start was not a
> variable, but rather a constant or an expression.
>
> The fix I chose turned out to be a l
Andre,
Here's a bit of wordsmith. I removed the abbreviation "Esp."
I'm not sure if there is additional markup needed; especially,
with the "-fcoarray=single" I inserted.
Coarray support has been reworked to allow access to components
in derived types that have not been compiled with coarray
On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 03:58:24PM +0100, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
>
> attached patches fix a 12-regression, when a caf token is requested from an
> abstract class-typed dummy. The token was not looked up in the correct spot.
> Due the class typed object getting an artificial variable for direct d
On Sat, Mar 01, 2025 at 03:56:21PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> the attached patch fixes a front-end memleak that is seen when
> running f951 under valgrind and while parsing invalid uses of
> NULLIFY.
>
> I had this in my tree for some time without any problems, in an
> attempt to further red
On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 09:36:20AM +0100, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> this patch is a variation of Jakub's patch in the PR, which
> avoids overflow on the mask used for exponentiation and
> fixes unsigned HOST_WIDE_INT. I tried testing this on
> a POWER machine, but --with-build-config=bootstrap-ubs
On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 09:31:12PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for mainline?
>
Looks reasonable.
> While it is a really old bug but wrong code, I'd like to backport
> this also at least to 14-branch. Any reservations?
If it passes regression testing,
On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 09:49:17PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> Am 01.02.25 um 21:03 schrieb Steve Kargl:
> > On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 07:25:51PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> > >
> > > the attached patch downgrades different constant character lengths in an
> >
On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 07:25:51PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> the attached patch downgrades different constant character lengths in an
> array constructor from a GNU to a legacy extension, so that users get a
> warning with -std=gnu. We continue to generate an error when standard
> conforman
On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 05:19:34PM +, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
>
> As of today, Gerhard Steinmetz has no fewer than 33 regressions to his name
> out of a total of 54 for fortran and libgfortran. It's time that some of
> these bugs are swatted, I think :-)
>
PR 70949 appears to have been fi
On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 05:19:34PM +, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
>
> As of today, Gerhard Steinmetz has no fewer than 33 regressions to his name
> out of a total of 54 for fortran and libgfortran. It's time that some of
> these bugs are swatted, I think :-)
>
This patch fixes PR71844. As th
On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 09:41:13PM +, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> There is one question to the reviewer(s), or those knowing better
> than me how to handle IEEE infinity and NaN: with -Ofast, I needed
> to add "-fno-finite-math-only" to the new testcase
> gfortran.dg/ieee/out_of_range.f90, as the
On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 05:19:34PM +, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
>
> As of today, Gerhard Steinmetz has no fewer than 33 regressions to his name
> out of a total of 54 for fortran and libgfortran. It's time that some of
> these bugs are swatted, I think :-)
>
When I was much more active in a
On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 10:33:53AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> As mentioned in the PR, there is a *.mod incompatibility between GCC 14 and
> GCC 15, at least when using iso_c_binding or iso_fortran_env intrinsic
> modules, because new entries have been added to those modules in the middle,
> c
On Tue, Jan 07, 2025 at 03:28:31PM +0100, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> the attached patch does what it says in the ChangeLog entry.
>
> Tested with "make dvi" and "make pdf".
>
> OK for trunk?
>
OK.
--
Steve
I'm ok withi your patch. It seems to also catch PR113928.
You may want to give others a chance to chime in.
--
steve
On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 09:34:38PM +, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> the check for potential aliasing of lhs and rhs currently shortcuts
> if the types differ. This is a problem
On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 10:09:26AM -0800, Jerry D wrote:
> On 12/18/24 4:11 AM, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > thanks for the draft patch.
> >
> > I haven't looked close enough, but you may have to add support
> > for 'asis' being an optional dummy variable. The following
> > example
On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 01:11:14PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> I haven't looked close enough, but you may have to add support
> for 'asis' being an optional dummy variable. The following
> example crashes here with a segfault:
>
(program snipped for brevity)
>
> There are other intrinsics
All,
First, I would like to thank both mikael and fx for providing
help in my debugging of the in-lining in trans-intrinsic.cc.
It seems I have forgotten much of what I once knew about trees.
I have attached a patch that implements F2023 F_C_STRING() to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 04:53:42AM -0800, Damian Rouson wrote:
> including automatic GPU offloading. Then a few months ago, the death blow
> that I couldn’t work around was robust support for kind type parameters.
>
gfortran doesn't have robust kind type parameters?
% cat xx.f90
program foo
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 10:05:49PM +, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> the attached patch fixes an ICE when passing an inquiry reference of a complex
> array to an assumed-rank dummy argument by terminating the search for the
> array reference before we hit the inquiry reference. (The arr
On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 01:01:39PM +0100, Mikael Morin wrote:
> Le 30/10/2024 à 23:00, Harald Anlauf a écrit :
> >
> > given that Jakub changed lots of whitespace in r15-4624-g50332a4fdd3243,
> > you may want to rebase your patches onto HEAD of trunk.
> >
> > May I also suggest to attach the patc
On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 02:55:11PM +0100, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> Steve found a test case where unsigned constants were not handled
> in a module. Single-line patch committed as obvious and simple,
> r15-5341-g66096151afc6631f8f2a3458b154c5daa822b963 .
>
> Best regards
>
> Thomas
>
Than
On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 10:00:29AM +0100, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> during testing, I noticed that parameters of the form
> - mod(u1,u2) were rejected with an unknown type. The fix
> is straightforward, but required an adjustment to another
> test case.
>
> Regression-tested. OK for trunk?
>
Ye
On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 04:41:40PM +, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
> This wrinkle to PR115700 came about because the associate-name string
> length was not being initialized, when an array selector had a substring
> reference with non-constant start or end. This, of course, caused
> subsequent re
On Sat, Oct 26, 2024 at 05:16:54PM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> OK for trunk?
>
OK, but see below.
> +@item @code{SUM}, @pxref{SUM}
> +@item @code{TRANSPOSE}, @pxref{TRANSPOSE}
> +@item @code{TRANSFER}, @pxref{TRANSFER}
> @end itemize
> +
> +The following intrincis are enabled with @option{
On Sat, Sep 28, 2024 at 08:32:00PM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> here's another small patch for FINDLOC for unsigned.
>
> OK for trunk?
>
OK. Other than UNSIGNED being a new experimental feature,
this patch almost qualifies as "Obvious".
--
Steve
OK. Thanks for the patch.
--
steve
On Sat, Sep 28, 2024 at 09:33:20AM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> this patch, consisting almost entirely of the test cases, implements
> CSHIFT and EOSHIFT for unsigneds.
>
> OK for trunk?
>
> Implement CSHIFT and EOSHIFT for unsigned.
>
> gcc/for
On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 08:12:01PM +0200, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
>
> the testcase is in the coarray directory, where tests are executed mit
> -fcoarray=single and lib. I don't know about none. Because the code stops
> compiling when it encounters a coarray with no single or lib. Therefore I
> su
On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 03:20:43PM +0200, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
>
> attached patch fixes a runtime issue when a coarray was passed as
> parameter to a procedure that was itself a parameter. The issue here
> was that the coarray was passed as array pointer (i.e. w/o descriptor)
> to the function
On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 11:02:42AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> While I understand the intent of 'positive form' vs 'negative form', the
> above might be clearer as
>
>Usage of intrinsics can be implemented either by generating a call
>to the libgf
On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 12:27:07PM +0200, Mikael Morin wrote:
> >
> > gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * invoke.texi(finline-intrinsics): Document new flag.
> > * lang.opt (finline-intrinsics, finline-intrinsics=,
> > fno-inline-intrinsics): New flags.
> > * options.cc (gfc_post_opt
OK. Sorry about dropping the balli on a review.
I thought it had already been approved and committed.
--
steve
On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 12:19:48PM +0200, Mikael Morin wrote:
> Ping:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2024-July/060640.html
>
> Maybe I could argue that I can self approve,
On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 12:10:18PM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> this version of the patch includes DOT_PRODUCT, MATMUL and quite
> a few improvements for simplification.
>
All,
I have gone through Thomas's current patch and sent a
few emails with comments to him. To keep thin
On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 09:07:20AM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Ping (a little bit)?
>
> With another weekend coming up, I would have some time to
> work on incorporating any feedback, or on putting in
> more intrinsics.
>
Last comment as I've made it to the end of the patch.
Your testcases ar
On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 09:07:20AM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Ping (a little bit)?
>
> With another weekend coming up, I would have some time to
> work on incorporating any feedback, or on putting in
> more intrinsics.
>
In the documentation, you have
+Generally, unsigned integers are only p
ault) to a legacy extension (warning by default).
>
> The feature is tested in at least 4 gfortran testcases. I adjusted
> the pattern of one of these tests to check for the downgrade.
>
> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for mainline?
>
> Thanks,
> Harald
>
>
On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 06:46:47PM +0200, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> Am 30.08.24 um 18:33 schrieb Steve Kargl:
> > On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 10:05:35PM +0200, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Should we downgrade this extension to GFC_STD_LEGACY?
> >
On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 10:05:35PM +0200, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> Am 29.08.24 um 21:53 schrieb Steve Kargl:
> > Thanks for the patch. If you have not already opened a new PR for the
> > other issue with C8107, I'll open one later today. It's likely that
> > w
Thanks for the patch. If you have not already opened a new PR for the
other issue with C8107, I'll open one later today. It's likely that
we need to check the namelist-group-name for USE association in
match.cc:gfc_match_namelist.
Hmmm, it seems we already catch the error, but accept it as an
ex
On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 06:46:08PM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> Steve,
>
> > On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 12:10:18PM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> > >
> > > this version of the patch includes DOT_PRODUCT, MATMUL and quite
> > > a few improvements for simplification.
> >
> > Thomas,
> >
> > Your upd
On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 12:17:46PM +0200, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
>
> attached small patch removes a VIEW_CONVERT that I erroneously inserted during
> patching pr110033. PR86468 fixes the (co-)rank computation and therefore this
> VIEW_CONVERT is IMO obsolete. I think it may cause hard to find ru
On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 12:10:18PM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>
> this version of the patch includes DOT_PRODUCT, MATMUL and quite
> a few improvements for simplification.
Thomas,
Your updated patch applied cleanly on top-of-tree gcc.
Bootstrap and regression testing on amd64-*-freebsd
comple
On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 11:09:10AM +0200, Mikael Morin wrote:
>
> These patches are about inlining, there is no manipulation of the parse
> tree. So I would rather use a separate option (-finline-intrinsics?).
I've only followed the discussion from afar, but gcc already supports
a -finline and -
Thanks for the patch and chasing down the magic.
Path is ok to commit.
--
steve
On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 05:32:26PM +0100, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Ping!
>
> I understand now why this works. The scope of the block is merged and so
> all the previous declarations that would othe
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 10:00:53PM +0200, Harald Anlauf wrote:
>
> the attached patch fixes an ICE occuring for ALLOCATE with SOURCE
> (or MOLD) of deferred character length in the scalar case, which
> looked obscure because the ICE disappears at -O1 and higher.
>
> The dump tree suggests that it
On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 09:13:23AM +0200, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> The original subsite has disappeared and we couldn't find it elsewhere.
>
https://github.com/gklimowicz/FCVS
gklimowicz is a flang developer and member of J3.
--
Steve
On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 01:37:32PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>
> >
> > That said, Fortran has the concept of model numbers, which
> > are set in arith.c. Does this change give the expected
> > value for ibm128? For example, with "REAL(16) X", one
> > has "DIGITS(X) = 113", which is the precision
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 01:27:53PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>
> Previously effective target fortran_real_c_float128 never
> passes on Power regardless of the default 128 long double
> is ibmlongdouble or ieeelongdouble. It's due to that TF
> mode is always used for kind 16 real, which has precisio
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 04:30:42PM +0100, Mikael Morin wrote:
> Hell(o),
>
> it didn't take long for my recent patch for PR111781 to show a regression.
> The fix proposed here is actually the one Harald posted in the PR.
> I can't imagine a case where it wouldn't do the right thing.
> Regression t
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 04:17:32PM +0100, FX Coudert wrote:
>
> These two (independent) patches add two tiny Fortran 2023 features: new
> ISO_FORTRAN_ENV named constants and SELECTED_LOGICAL_KIND intrinsic.
>
> Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
> Please review, and let me know i
On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 08:06:10PM -0800, Jerry D wrote:
> On 3/5/24 1:51 PM, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> > Hi Jerry,
> >
> > on further thought, do we sanitize 'child_iomsg'?
> > We pass it to snprintf as format.
> >
> > Wouldn't a strncpy be sufficient?
> >
> > Harald
> >
> >
>
> Just to be safe
On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 09:36:43AM -0800, Jerry D wrote:
> On 2/29/24 1:47 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>
> > And, just for my own education, the length limitation of iomsg to 255
> > chars is not backed by the standard AFAICS, right? It's just our
> > STRERR_MAXSZ?
>
> Yes, its what we ha
All,
Consider,
! { dg-do run }
program foo
implicit none
real y
associate (x => log(cmplx(-1,0)))
y = x%im
if (int(100*y)-314 /= 0) stop 1
end associate
end program
% gfcx -c a.f90
a.f90:6:13:
6 | y = x%im
| 1
Error: Symbol 'x' at (1) has no I
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 10:15:17PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> Hi Steve, all,
>
> here's an updated patch with an enhanced testcase that also
> checks MOLD= besides SOURCE=.
>
> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Is it OK for mainline?
>
>From my viewpoint, yes.
Thanks for finding a better s
On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 09:22:37PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> Hi Steve!
>
> On 2/22/24 01:52, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 01:42:32PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 10:20:43PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> > > >
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 01:42:32PM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 10:20:43PM +0100, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> > On 2/21/24 22:00, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > memleak vs ICE. I think I'll take one over the other.
> > > Probably need to free code->
1 - 100 of 1074 matches
Mail list logo
