On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 07:20:10PM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> *** PING ***
>
> I think it is now a bit late for 4.8. Thus, I change my request to: OK
> for the 4.9 trunk?
>
IMHO, yes. Don't know if others have an opinion, but
waiting any longer would seem to be counter productive.
--
Stev
*** PING ***
I think it is now a bit late for 4.8. Thus, I change my request to: OK
for the 4.9 trunk?
Tobias
On January 5, 2013 00:31, Tobias Burnus wrote:
This patch "removes" -fno-whole-file. (Actually, it turns it into
"Ignore".)
Reasoning:
* -fwhole-file/-fno-whole-file was added in
Dominique Dhumieres wrote:
(1) Is there any hint of -fno-whole-file misbehavior (as suggested by the
second point of the "Reasoning")?
The middle end is simply not prepared for having multiple declaration
for a single file ("translation unit"), which leads to wrong
optimizations and thus to w
Sorry for the late and lengthy answer. To make the story short, I think
the decision to remove -fno-whole-file should be based on the answer to the
following questions:
(1) Is there any hint of -fno-whole-file misbehavior (as suggested by the
second point of the "Reasoning")?
As said in my comm
Early * ping * the patch below, i.e.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-01/msg00033.html
Other pending patches by me:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-01/msg00049.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-01/msg00025.html
Other pending patches by …
Thomas: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2013-01/
This patch "removes" -fno-whole-file. (Actually, it turns it into "Ignore".)
Reasoning:
* -fwhole-file/-fno-whole-file was added in 4.5 to make the transition
easier; -fwhole-file is the default since 4.6.
* There are many wrong-code issues and probably also some ICEs with
-fno-whole file.
