Dear Paul, 

mostly looks good. Apart from a regression with optional arguments reported as
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90093 
all other  test cases I have now execute correctly.

Cheers
Reinhold

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com>
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 14. April 2019 20:16
> An: Thomas Koenig <tkoe...@netcologne.de>
> Cc: Gilles Gouaillardet <gil...@rist.or.jp>; Bader, Reinhold
> <reinhold.ba...@lrz.de>; fort...@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-patches <gcc-
> patc...@gcc.gnu.org>
> Betreff: Re: [Patch, fortran] PRs 89843 and 90022 - C Fortran Interop fixes.
> 
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> Thanks a lot. Committed as revision 270353.
> 
> I was determined not to repeat the PDT experience, which is still nagging at
> me. That has to be the next major gfc project, I guess.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Paul
> 
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 at 18:08, Thomas Koenig <tkoe...@netcologne.de>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> >
> > > Please find attached the updated patch, which fixes the problem with
> > > -m32 in PR90022, eliminates the temporary creation for INTENT(IN)
> > > dummies and fixes PR89846.
> > >
> > > While it looks like it should be intrusive because of its size, I
> > > believe that the patch is still safe for trunk since it is hidden
> > > behind tests for CFI descriptors.
> > >
> > > Bootstraps and regtests on FC29/x86_64 - OK for trunk?
> >
> > OK.
> >
> > I we're going into the gcc 9 release with an implementation of the C
> > interop features, it will be better with fewer bugs :-)
> >
> > Thanks a lot for working on it!
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >         Thomas
> 
> 
> 
> --
> "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough"
> - Albert Einstein

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to