On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 at 17:55, Paul Richard Thomas
wrote:
>
> Hi Christophe,
>
> As far as I can tell, the problem with reduce_1.f90 is restricted to one call
> to the scalar valued version of the new intrinsic function. When the result
> is array valued, all seems to be well.
>
> I would be grate
Hi Christophe,
I have posted what I think is a fix for this problem with comment 14 of
PR119460. I would be grateful if you or one of your colleagues would give
it a spin at your earliest convenience.
It will be submitted before Monday morning.
Best regards
Paul
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 at 17:32, C
Hi Christophe,
As far as I can tell, the problem with reduce_1.f90 is restricted to one
call to the scalar valued version of the new intrinsic function. When the
result is array valued, all seems to be well.
I would be grateful if you would apply the attached patch and let me know
if the problem
Hello Christophe,
I wrote to Thiago Bauermann, who was very helpful on the last occasion that
you picked up a bug in one of my patches.
As it happens, Harald Anlauf pointed out that the problem occurs with -m32
on x86_64 systems and so I am able to investigate it on my system. Thus
far, I have dr
Hi!
On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 at 19:22, Paul Richard Thomas
wrote:
>
> Hi Andre,
>
> Thanks for the review - I'll act on the points that you raised.
>
> The Linaro people reported a failure in reduce_1.f90 execution, which I
> believe is due to incorrect casting of 'dim' and a wrong specification of i
