--- Comment #14 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-07 20:50 ---
Created an attachment (id=14503)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14503action=view)
updated to gcc-4.3 trunk
updated against gcc-trunk (for 4.3.0)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
--- Comment #6 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-30 18:26 ---
Fixed for 4.3.0
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #20 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-01 11:55 ---
Tripping exactly this while thinking about uclibc on hurd.
To me it looks like linux.h shouldn't be included and gnu.h should be made
uclibc-aware..
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #4 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-26 18:43 ---
For the fortran frontend, It seems that i have this patch (must be relatively
old; undetermined status, ATM).
Index: gcc/fortran/Make-lang.in
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-26 18:53 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
For the fortran frontend, It seems that i have this patch (must be relatively
old; undetermined status, ATM).
Scratch that. Testing a working version that i will attach when it passes
--- Comment #9 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-21 15:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=14238)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14238action=view)
add --enable-intermodule for libgfortran
2007-09-21 Bernhard Fischer aldot
PR fortran/31546
--- Comment #10 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-21 15:56 ---
fx, I cannot apply this patch since i cannot autoreconf with the appropriate
versions of autoconf and automake. Can you apply it with the regenerated files,
please (and assign this bug to you, if you want)?
TIA
--- Comment #3 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 09:37 ---
Created an attachment (id=14186)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14186action=view)
slightly reduced testcase
ICEs with -O1
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33382
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33396
--- Comment #1 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 16:47 ---
Created an attachment (id=14190)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14190action=view)
libgcc patch#1
libgcc/ChangeLog:
2007-09-11 Bernhard Fischer
* configure.ac: Add option --enable
--- Comment #2 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 16:54 ---
With trunk r127829, this currently gives:
/scratch/obj.i686/gcc-4.3/./prev-gcc/libgcc.a(libgcc_onestep.o): In function
`isinfd128':
../../../../src/gcc-4.3/libgcc/config/libbid/_isinfd128.c:38: undefined
reference
--- Comment #3 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 17:58 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
With trunk r127829, this currently gives:
/scratch/obj.i686/gcc-4.3/./prev-gcc/libgcc.a(libgcc_onestep.o): In function
`isinfd128':
../../../../src/gcc-4.3/libgcc/config/libbid
--- Comment #27 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-11 18:58 ---
This also happens on SuSE-10.2, x86-64
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30915
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28482
--- Comment #4 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-25 16:04 ---
Created an attachment (id=14113)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14113action=view)
gcov-iov.h dependency and BUGURL bugfixes
On 4.3, also the recently added BUGURL needs to be added for the onestep
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-25 22:10 ---
Subject: Bug 30620
Author: aldot
Date: Sat Aug 25 22:10:28 2007
New Revision: 127802
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=127802
Log:
2007-08-26 Bernhard Fischer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #6 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-25 22:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=14116)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14116action=view)
add missing includes of config.h to avoid conflicts in prototypes for LFS funcs
gfortran-4.3-PR31546-config.h-inc
--- Comment #4 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-22 20:07 ---
I'll try to find the time to thing about VN / PRE. Thanks, stevenb, for your
comment.
Please feel free to ping or take this if i time out (as usual)..
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-22 20:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=14096)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14096action=view)
add enable-intermodule for libgfortran against r127717
Updated patch to allow for configuring libgfortran
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--
Summary: [dataflow] cc1 goes into infinite loop
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-21 16:44 ---
Without combine, the attribute is ignored:
$ gcc-4.3.orig-HEAD -c pr.c -o /dev/null
pr.c: In function 'f1':
pr.c:3: warning: '__weakref__' attribute ignored
pr.c: In function 'f2':
pr.c:7: warning: '__weakref__
--- Comment #4 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-04 17:20 ---
fx, are you still working on this?
yet another reason why -M as an alias for -J should be dropped and instead
proper -M dependency handling should be added is this:
$ echo end foo.f90 gfortran -o main foo.f90 -v
--- Comment #15 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-22 18:10 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
Can this be considered fixed?
The initial issue is IMO fixed, the other questions raised in this PR are not
dealt with, AFAIK. See comments #8 to #10. Due to these, i did not close
--- Comment #1 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-03 11:16 ---
Maybe related to 30438, 18624
I started to do
Index: gcc/tree.h
===
--- gcc/tree.h (revision 124373)
+++ gcc/tree.h (working copy)
@@ -364,7 +364,7
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-02 21:40 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14634#c12
has a similar case, from the looks, and is a regression WRT 4.1.2 where this
did work fine for me (the diagnostic was not garbled).
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu
--- Comment #3 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-02 21:43 ---
Richi suggested it was a FE bug.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31537
--- Comment #3 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 08:52 ---
Works with gcc version 4.2.0 20060922
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
--- Comment #1 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-17 19:08 ---
Created an attachment (id=13381)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13381action=view)
file1
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31611
--- Comment #2 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-17 19:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=13382)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13382action=view)
file2
$ gfortran-4.3-HEAD -ffixed-line-length-none -ffree-line-length-none -O1
-ftree-loop-linear -c lattice.f90
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #3 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 12:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=13367)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13367action=view)
updated patch
Updated patch.
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #4 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 12:39 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
(In reply to comment #0)
This creates a smaller binary and may also create a faster binary. The
former
is the main motivation from my POV.
Do you have figures to justify these two
--- Comment #4 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 15:55 ---
With current 4_2-branch, targeting i686, while bootstrapping i get:
i686-linux-uclibc-gcc -O2 -O2 -fno-tree-loop-optimize -Os
-fno-tree-dominator-opts -fno-strength-reduce -fno-branch-count-reg
-falign-functions=1
--- Comment #7 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-14 19:33 ---
Subject: Bug 21061
Author: aldot
Date: Sat Apr 14 19:33:11 2007
New Revision: 123820
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=123820
Log:
2007-04-14 Bernhard Fischer
PR fortran/21061
--- Comment #1 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-13 14:32 ---
Created an attachment (id=13363)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13363action=view)
inaccurate bypass
Not a patch.
By marking ultimate target's asm_written_flag and bailing if it was already
set
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
BugsThisDependsOn: 31537
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31546
--- Comment #1 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-12 15:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=13356)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13356action=view)
patch to add --enable-intermodule to libgfortran
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31546
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31537
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31524
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code, build
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-linux-gnu
GCC target
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30762
--- Comment #1 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-11 10:24 ---
Created an attachment (id=13031)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13031action=view)
reduced from gcc/double-int.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30762
--- Comment #2 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-11 10:24 ---
Created an attachment (id=13032)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13032action=view)
reduced from tree-ssa-loop-niter.c
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30762
--- Comment #3 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-11 10:26 ---
May be related to 29478 according to apinski. This one blocks compilation
rather than just generating an unpleasant warning, tough.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30762
--- Comment #4 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-11 10:28 ---
Works with
gcc version 4.1.2 20061115 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-21)
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-11 11:05 ---
Created an attachment (id=13033)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13033action=view)
smaller testcase for the tree-ssa-loop-niter part
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #6 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-11 11:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=13034)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13034action=view)
minimal testcase file 1
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #7 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-11 11:58 ---
Created an attachment (id=13035)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13035action=view)
minimal testcase file 2
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #8 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-11 11:59 ---
Fails to merge type information from different TUs?
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-10 19:01 ---
Created an attachment (id=13030)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13030action=view)
add gcov-iov.h to the prerequisited of libbackend.o
Patch against the gcc-4_2-branch
--
http://gcc.gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-08 17:30 ---
I was seeing this bug when building with BOOT_CFLAGS=-march=nocona\
-mtune=nocona\ -O2 that later ICE'd for ../gcc/libgcc2.c:557
I don't have access to that x86_64 with ubuntu anymore so cannot check if the
patch
--- Comment #2 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-04 14:53 ---
4.1.2 prerelease-20070128 fails on --enable-intermodule too:
buildroot.arm/toolchain_build_arm/gcc-4.1.2-20070128/gcc/config/arm/arm.c -o
lib
backend.o \
-DBASEVER=\4.1.2\ -DDATESTAMP=\ 20070129
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|ICE on frtl-abstract- |ICE on frtl-abstract-
|sequences and mthumb
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30620
--- Comment #1 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-28 11:45 ---
I assume that this works with 4.1 but did not verify. If so, that's obviously a
[4.2 Regression]
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.2.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30486
--- Comment #3 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-28 00:28 ---
on i686, cross compiling for i586, i see:
/bin/sh ../libtool --mode=compile
/home/cow/src/buildroot.mine/build_i586/staging_dir/bin/i586-linux-uclibc-gcc
-DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I.
-I/home/cow/src/buildroot.mine
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: x86_64-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: arm-linux
--- Comment #3 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-15 09:15 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
The variable is set but not read from.
There is another bug about this for the C/C++ front-ends and a new option for
this case instead of just using -Wunused.
I would considered t
--- Comment #1 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-15 19:52 ---
Does not seem to ICE for me on i386 with each of
$ gcc-2.95 --version
2.95.4
$ gcc-3.4 --version
gcc-3.4 (GCC) 3.4.6 (Debian 3.4.6-4)
$ gcc-4.1 --version
gcc-4.1 (GCC) 4.1.2 20061028 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-19
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-14 11:37 ---
Bernhard,
Are you going to apply this to 4.2, or do you want me to do it? It would be
nice to clear the PR.
Please feel free to backport this and (eventually) all other i left unfixed for
non-trunk versions
--- Comment #13 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-07 16:23 ---
Subject: Bug 27698
Author: aldot
Date: Sun Jan 7 16:23:45 2007
New Revision: 120549
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=120549
Log:
fortran/ChangeLog
2007-01-03 Bernhard Fischer [EMAIL PROTECTED
--- Comment #27 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-06 19:36 ---
(In reply to comment #24)
Created an attachment (id=12855)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12855action=view) [edit]
nb: includes regenerated configure
For now I'd like to go with this simple
)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: build, patch, link-failure
Severity: critical
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-04 11:21 ---
Created an attachment (id=12854)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12854action=view)
Add configure option to en- or disable-largefile
libstdc++/ChangeLog
2007-01-04 Bernhard Fischer [EMAIL
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-04 11:32 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
First uclibc really should support Large file support either the way BSD
handle
it (in my mind the correct way) or the way SYSV does.
The user can optionally turn it off
--- Comment #7 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-04 11:36 ---
removing wrong keyword link-failure
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-04 11:46 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
By the way, the attached patch seems wrong, because changes GLIBCXX_CHECK_LFS,
which is not run at all when $GLIBCXX_IS_NATIVE is false.
The hunk against acinclude.m4 should perhaps
--- Comment #14 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-04 11:49 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
(In reply to comment #5)
(In reply to comment #2)
First uclibc really should support Large file support either the way BSD
handle
it (in my mind the correct way) or the way SYSV
--- Comment #15 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-04 11:51 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
The question is how did JSM get uclibc to work when he patched libstdc++ for
it
(PR 14939) ? Was he using a newer uclibc which actually has LFS support or
something else?
He forced
--- Comment #18 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-04 12:58 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
The comment does not match up with the actually check :).
I have a patch pending that fixes all these incorrect occurances of uclibc
where it ment to say uClinux. I intended to send
--- Comment #19 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-01-04 13:00 ---
(In reply to comment #16)
Irrespective of the other historical issues, assuming the test can be
changed
to an AC_TRY_COMPILE, probably can be run also for crosses, we can pass to it
an --enable-lfs library
--- Comment #11 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-18 15:23 ---
Disallowing a dollar sign as the very first character in a name even if
-fdollar-ok was requested by the user seems to be a simple omission to me.
Whether we want to allow for such invalid code
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot
--- Comment #12 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-10 17:34 ---
untake it since Brooks was faster in testing it.
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-11/msg00221.html
that added -fmax-errors
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686
--- Comment #2 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-09 23:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=12583)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12583action=view)
slightly smaller testcase
Confirmed.
Works on x86_64, ICEs on i686.
Also ICEs with gcc version 4.2.0 20061018
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Comment #10 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-06 19:14 ---
Should there be a default (I currently default to 100) for -ferror-count?
I did choose to add one single check into gfc_warning_check, so we don't
immediately bail out if the error count did exceed the given limit
--- Comment #11 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-06 19:41 ---
Mine.
Will regtest when i get to a machine with TeX installed.
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 14:57 ---
Subject: Bug 21061
Author: aldot
Date: Sun Nov 5 14:57:24 2006
New Revision: 118501
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118501
Log:
2006-11-05 Bernhard Fischer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #6 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 16:19 ---
Updating the testsuite to account for the new error message now.
Note that i think that we should take -fdollar-ok into account, i.e.:
if (!ISALPHA (c) !(gfc_option.flag_dollar_ok c == '$'))
{
bail
--- Comment #8 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 16:37 ---
How does Intel's iand other commercial compilers handle
a leading dollar? The standard is quite clear that the
first character in a name is an alphabetic character.
ifort-9.1.xx accept it without any notice.
Why
--- Comment #10 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-05 17:16 ---
IIRC, the use of $ is a Digital extension on VMS. It's
been more than 15 years since I used VMS, but I vaguely
remmeber seeing Fortran with the $ only in the 2nd position.
But, if Intel (a Digital descented
--- Comment #3 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 19:29 ---
Yes, from the looks it will also fix pr29634.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29539
--- Comment #14 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 19:30 ---
Fixed on trunk.
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status
--- Comment #1 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 19:33 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
The following gives an ICE:
type foo
integer :: i
end type foo
interface fun_interface
type(foo) function fun()
end function fun
end interface
contains
--- Comment #2 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-01 21:44 ---
For your initial testcase, Lahey talks about
Compiling program unit main at line 1:
Interface body name(fun)
1173-S: SOURCE.F90, line 6: Derived type definition for 'foo' missing.
Internal subprogram name
--- Comment #11 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-31 23:39 ---
Subject: Bug 29537
Author: aldot
Date: Tue Oct 31 23:38:58 2006
New Revision: 118347
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118347
Log:
fortran/ChangeLog:
2006-11-01 Bernhard Fischer [EMAIL PROTECTED
--- Comment #12 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-31 23:42 ---
(In reply to comment #10)
Bernhard,
This is ok for trunk.
Thanks. Worth backporting this to 4.2 (and 4.1) in a week or two?
--
aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #8 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-27 08:58 ---
I forgot the texi file..
makeinfo -v --split-size=500 --split-size=500 --split-size=500 -I
/USER/philippe/Irix/Gcc_Sources/gcc/doc/include -I
/USER/philippe/Irix/Gcc_Sources/gcc/fortran -o doc
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-26 11:18 ---
pr27516 is different in that pr27516 calls makeinfo even if there was no
makeinfo detected.
PPS: For me it fails with
[]
makeinfo: getwd: doc/gfortran.info,
make[3]: *** [doc/gfortran.info] Error 1
make[3
--- Comment #9 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-26 12:59 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
Created an attachment (id=12476)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12476action=view) [edit]
untested proposed fix
I hope to test this patch soon.
bootstrapped
Keywords: rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: preprocessor
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC build triplet: i686-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet: i686-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet: i686
--- Comment #12 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-24 20:41 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
*** Bug 29586 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Fair enough.
Still pr29586 seems to be a diagnostic bug since the warning is mangled:
$ cat blah.c
#warning (that's not C
--- Comment #5 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-22 11:36 ---
I think the code in comment #1 is valid.
f95, 5.5.2.4 Differences between named common and blank common
reads:
A blank common block has the same properties as a named common block except
(iii) [...] objects in blank
--- Comment #6 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-22 11:50 ---
I think the code in comment #1 is valid.
Rejecting blank common in block data stmts would add a regression in
testsuite's blockdata_1.f90 like so:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/src/gcc-4.2/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg$ gfortran
--- Comment #8 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-22 21:08 ---
Created an attachment (id=12476)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12476action=view)
untested proposed fix
I hope to test this patch soon.
Note that it adds a warning about blank common in block
201 - 300 of 373 matches
Mail list logo
