On 5/17/23 11:52 AM, Harald Anlauf via Fortran wrote:
Dear all,
the attached patch is neat, because it fixes a bug by removing code ;-)
When generating the initializer for a parameter array, we excepted
the case of size 0, which however prevented the detection of array
bounds violations and
On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 1:15 PM Larry Lemons via Fortran
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I inherited a project where the customer wants us to re-build this ForTran
> application with a more modern compiler. I did some research and found that
> the GCC compiler probably has the most up to date compiler
Hello,
I inherited a project where the customer wants us to re-build this ForTran
application with a more modern compiler. I did some research and found that
the GCC compiler probably has the most up to date compiler available, so we
decided to us 13.1.0 version of GCC. It has been about 40
Le 17/05/2023 à 20:52, Harald Anlauf via Fortran a écrit :
Dear all,
the attached patch is neat, because it fixes a bug by removing code ;-)
When generating the initializer for a parameter array, we excepted
the case of size 0, which however prevented the detection of array
bounds violations
Dear all,
the attached patch is neat, because it fixes a bug by removing code ;-)
When generating the initializer for a parameter array, we excepted
the case of size 0, which however prevented the detection of array
bounds violations and lead to ICEs in various places. The solution
which
Hi Jakub,
On 16.05.23 13:00, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 11:45:16AM +0200, Frederik Harwath wrote:
The place where different compilers implement the loop transformations
was discussed in an OpenMP loop transformation meeting last year. Two
compilers (another one and GCC with
The patch has now been committed as r14-931-g80bb0b8a81fdc5
The only change is that I added the &_P in 'if (sym->ts.deferred &&
VAR_P (length))' in trans-decl.cc just to avoid potential issues in case
length is not a var decl (but e.g. a '0' tree node, cf. code).
Tobias
On 23.03.23 10:28,
