https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114626
--- Comment #2 from Arjen Markus ---
Thanks for the explanation - that is clear enough.
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 57894
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57894=edit
Sou
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 52686
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52686=edit
Program that demonstrates the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104048
--- Comment #2 from Arjen Markus ---
That reduced example is wonderfully compact! (I checked for similar reports but
probably missed bug report 79440, because it was not associated with
"recursive" data types)
: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 52205
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52205=edit
Source of the program in question
The attached program causes an
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 52204
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52204=edit
Source of the program in quest
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30372
--- Comment #17 from Arjen Markus ---
As UMASK has two arguments, should it be possible to combine integer arguments
of different kinds? That is:
integer(kind=1) :: mask
integer(kind=8) :: old
call umask( mask, old )
(Probably a bit overdoing
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30372
--- Comment #16 from Arjen Markus ---
To get more involved in gfortran, I thought this issue might be a good starting
point (it is the first of a number that Steve Kargl posted some time ago for
this purpose). I added a small test program to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30372
Arjen Markus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arjen.markus895 at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95038
Arjen Markus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arjen.markus895 at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84007
Arjen Markus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arjen.markus895 at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80931
--- Comment #8 from Arjen Markus ---
Thank you! I do appreciate such comments - apart from the fun it was
to write the book and experiment with all the features of Fortran, it
is great to hear that other people enjoy it too.
Regards,
Arjen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80931
--- Comment #6 from Arjen Markus ---
Yes, I am :).
Regards,
Arjen
2018-08-16 14:02 GMT+02:00 snowfed at mail dot ru :
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80931
>
> --- Comment #5 from snowfed ---
> If you don't mind my asking, are
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83196
--- Comment #5 from Arjen Markus ---
(In reply to Arjen Markus from comment #4)
> Created attachment 44543 [details]
> Sample module exhibiting the problem
>
> ICE at line 11329 - any reduction seems to make the problem go away (but
> also the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83196
Arjen Markus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arjen.markus895 at gmail dot
com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80931
Arjen Markus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||arjen.markus895 at gmail dot
com
iority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Experimenting with array indices of non-default kind - "long" or "large"
integers - I happened to stumble on the follow
: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The Fortran 2008 standard allows pointer variables to be initialised as:
real, dimension(100), target :: array
real, dimension(:), pointer :: parray => array
Wh
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67779
--- Comment #7 from Arjen Markus ---
Yes, I can confirm this - I also tried with the Intel Fortran compiler and that
sorts the integers and strings in the way one would expect.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67779
--- Comment #3 from Arjen Markus ---
Let me clarify:
the STRING "String = 10" should come after the STRING "String = 1 ". It is not
a matter of the numbers inside. If you compare these strings with LLT(), you
will see this.
: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 36421
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=36421=edit
Source file demonstrating the problem
The attached program constru
t: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The following code causes the compiler to produce a message about an ambiguous
reference and then to crash with a segmentation fault (this is on Windows 7,
both MinGW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50221
Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com
I needed to pass a null pointer from Fortran to C. One attempt to do so was via
code like this:
module myinterfaces
use iso_c_binding
implicit none
interface
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64474
--- Comment #2 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com ---
Hi Janus,
thanks for looking into this. Personally, I have no problem moving to
version 4.9. It's just that I ran into the problem.
Regards,
Arjen
2015-01-02 16:28 GMT+01
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61628
--- Comment #17 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com ---
Hi Jerry,
thank you very much for looking into this problem. I stopped reducing
the test case because I thought it had to do with pack creating a
temporary array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61628
--- Comment #15 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com ---
Hi Jerry,
I am glad you have been able to reproduce the problem and even reduce
the program to a bare minimum.
What a curious number to fail upon. What I can do is try
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61628
--- Comment #9 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com ---
Hi Jerry,
no problem - I can imagine that you did not see anything wrong. It
took me sometime to realise myself what was going on when I discovered
this problem.
Regards
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61628
--- Comment #12 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com ---
Hi Dominique,
that is the sort of output I would expect indeed. The memory leak is
to be expected: the program does not explicitly release the allocated
array/matrix
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61628
--- Comment #7 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com ---
Hi Jerry,
no, it does not - it should have printed all values in the array
(matrix) that are not 1, the first one thousand elements and finally
it should have printed Done
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61628
--- Comment #3 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com ---
Hi Dominique, Jerry,
I just tried it myself:
- Download the tgz file from Bugzilla
- unzip it via gunzip
- use tar xvf to extract the file
The result was the same file
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61628
--- Comment #5 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com ---
I am not entirely certain, but I think it was simply part of the MinGW
installation. If not, I used the
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GFortranBinaries site to locate one.
Regards
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com
Created attachment 33016
-- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33016action=edit
Example data file as used
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50252
--- Comment #3 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com 2011-09-01
07:18:30 UTC ---
Hi Janus,
that seems quite to the point and it is much more straightforward than
my (minimal)
adjustment. Thanks.
The reason I brought
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50252
Bug #: 50252
Summary: Error message on call x%y (x not declared) can be
more informative
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50225
Bug #: 50225
Summary: The allocation status for polymorphic allocatable
variables is not set properly
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.2
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49557
--- Comment #12 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com 2011-07-04
06:58:46 UTC ---
Hello,
well, I have re-read the installation instructions, put the sources
for gmp, mpfr and mpc into the GCC source
directory, reconfigured it (from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49557
--- Comment #8 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com 2011-07-01
12:37:06 UTC ---
Hi Eric,
I have run into a problem on a Linux machin with this:
make[3]: Leaving directory `/u/markus/tmp/gcc4.6.1/build-gcc/gcc'
mkdir -p -- x86_64
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49557
--- Comment #7 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com 2011-06-29
06:18:47 UTC ---
Hi Eric,
yes, that might be a good idea. Another test I can do, just to make
sure it is the make version that comes with MInGW is to try
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49557
Summary: Building the GCC compiler suite fails on a Makefile
concerning Ada
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49557
--- Comment #2 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com 2011-06-28
09:12:00 UTC ---
Hi Eric,
thanks for looking into this. If I use an absolute path, then the
make command chokes on the lack of a target for configure as
required
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49557
--- Comment #4 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com 2011-06-28
09:40:56 UTC ---
Hi Eric,
I used the path d://configure, perhaps I should have used
/d//configure
I am using the make utility that comes with MinGW/MSYS:
GNU
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49557
--- Comment #5 from Arjen Markus arjen.markus895 at gmail dot com 2011-06-28
11:45:17 UTC ---
When I remove the directories libada and gcc/ada to prevent make from
attempting to build Ada, the build process fails on a missing % for a pattern
43 matches
Mail list logo
