Tobias Burnus wrote:
This one compiles just as well, of course.
From my side, that patch (using MAX) is fine. Thanks for
bearing the bootstrap failure and for the patch.
I have now committed it (i.e. Rainer's patch) as Rev. 220182.
I have also committed the fixed-up/combined patch to the 4.9
Rainer Orth wrote:
> > Why don't you use MAX macro instead of std::max as everywhere else
> > in the gcc sources?
>
> No idea, ask Tobias :-)
No real reason - presumably, because I had MAX not in mind and thought
of the general move towards standard features.
> Anyway, the original patch would mo
Jakub Jelinek writes:
>> The problem is (as so often) that was included *before*
>> config.h. Moving it after the other includes allows interface.c to
>> compile without warnings.
>
> Why don't you use MAX macro instead of std::max as everywhere else
> in the gcc sources?
No idea, ask Tobias :
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 03:55:17PM +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
> Steve Kargl writes:
>
> > On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 06:13:04PM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> >>if (s1->as->type == AS_EXPLICIT)
> >> - for (i = 0; i < s1->as->rank + s1->as->corank; i++)
> >> + for (i = 0; i < s1->as->rank + s
Steve Kargl writes:
> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 06:13:04PM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>>if (s1->as->type == AS_EXPLICIT)
>> -for (i = 0; i < s1->as->rank + s1->as->corank; i++)
>> +for (i = 0; i < s1->as->rank + std::max(0, s1->as->corank-1); i++)
>
> Doesn't this require '#include
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 06:13:04PM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>if (s1->as->type == AS_EXPLICIT)
> - for (i = 0; i < s1->as->rank + s1->as->corank; i++)
> + for (i = 0; i < s1->as->rank + std::max(0, s1->as->corank-1); i++)
Doesn't this require '#include '?
I suspect that you are d
Build and regtested on x86-64-gnu-linux.
OK for the trunk and 4.9? (It's a regression.)
Tobias
2015-01-24 Tobias Burnus
PR fortran/64771
gcc/fortran/
* interface.c (check_dummy_characteristics): Fix coarray handling.
testsuite/
* gfortran.dg/coarray_36.f: New.
* gfortran.dg/coarray_37.f9
