[Bug fortran/36403] [4.4 Regression] Some fortran tests using eoshift fail on SH

2008-07-28 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- domob at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |domob at gcc dot gnu dot org |dot org

[Bug fortran/36934] [4.4 regression] Spurious ambiguous reference to...ERROR/ICE

2008-07-25 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-25 17:13 --- Hm... The tree I used for this check-in seems not to produce the crash, but my current working-copy for finalization (updated last yesterday evening) shows it (GNU/Linux-x86-32). I will try to find out more

[Bug fortran/36934] [4.4 regression] Spurious ambiguous reference to...ERROR/ICE

2008-07-25 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-25 18:28 --- New status, I did update my other tree (unpatched) to the latest SVN, and couldn't reproduce the problem there. Maybe I messed something up or the problem occurs not unconditionally... With the patched finalizer

[Bug fortran/31243] truncating strings longer than 2**32 characters

2008-07-24 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-24 16:31 --- This seems to be still in there... Any interest that I work on this? What's about emitting a warning if either len= or a substring-reference expression is of a KIND that can have larger values than the machine can

[Bug fortran/36403] [4.4 Regression] Some fortran tests using eoshift fail on SH

2008-07-24 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-24 17:03 --- Isn't this maybe a general problem about optional string arguments? Or is this really a eoshift-specific problem? I'm just thinking about a general solution for this kind of problem if it isn't; in that case

[Bug fortran/33141] Intrinsic procedures: Improve warning/error with -std=*

2008-07-24 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-24 18:53 --- Subject: Bug 33141 Author: domob Date: Thu Jul 24 18:52:51 2008 New Revision: 138122 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=138122 Log: 2008-07-24 Daniel Kraft [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR fortran

[Bug fortran/33141] Intrinsic procedures: Improve warning/error with -std=*

2008-07-24 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-24 19:16 --- Resolving fixed, discussion on better option names and minor changes welcome :) -- domob at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/29835] Error message of unknown edit descriptor needs improvement

2008-07-22 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-22 17:06 --- Subject: Bug 29835 Author: domob Date: Tue Jul 22 17:05:55 2008 New Revision: 138063 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=138063 Log: 2008-07-22 Daniel Kraft [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR fortran

[Bug fortran/29835] Error message of unknown edit descriptor needs improvement

2008-07-22 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-22 17:11 --- The message locus for constant-string is not yet perfect, but the effort to benefit ratio in this case is probably rather bad, so I mark this as fixed. In my commit, I changed the Unexpected element error to include

[Bug fortran/33141] Intrinsic procedures: Improve warning/error with -std=*

2008-07-21 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-21 10:02 --- Created an attachment (id=15935) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15935action=view) Proposed test cases Here's a set of test-cases (as diff) as I plan to fix this bug (dg-format may not yet

[Bug fortran/33141] Intrinsic procedures: Improve warning/error with -std=*

2008-07-21 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-21 12:17 --- (In reply to comment #5) For the INTRINSIC :: error, one could consider mentioning -fall-intrinsics in the error message. I'll do so (as I already do in the warning message), this makes of course sense

[Bug fortran/33141] Intrinsic procedures: Improve warning/error with -std=*

2008-07-19 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-19 09:38 --- I want to work on this and started experimenting... Consider this test: ! ASINH is an intrinsic function as of F2008, not before. ! XXX: I hope so... REAL FUNCTION asinh (arg) IMPLICIT NONE REAL :: arg ! Do

[Bug fortran/33221] Cannot declare variables of TYPE without components

2008-07-12 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-12 11:27 --- Subject: Bug 33221 Author: domob Date: Sat Jul 12 11:26:50 2008 New Revision: 137737 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=137737 Log: 2008-07-12 Daniel Kraft [EMAIL PROTECTED] * resolve.c

[Bug fortran/36492] incorrect error when compiling

2008-06-21 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-21 07:59 --- (In reply to comment #8) I just downloaded the latest trunk version, which is GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.4.0 20080616 (experimental) [trunk revision 136838] Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc. I

[Bug fortran/36517] Type-spec in array constructor: Invalid error for -std=f2003/f2008

2008-06-18 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-18 13:54 --- Subject: Bug 36517 Author: domob Date: Wed Jun 18 13:53:32 2008 New Revision: 136894 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=136894 Log: 2008-06-18 Daniel Kraft [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR fortran

[Bug fortran/36112] Bounds-checking on character length not working for array-constructors

2008-06-18 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- domob at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.4.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36112

[Bug fortran/36492] incorrect error when compiling

2008-06-18 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-18 13:56 --- Committed patch and fixed as rev 136894. -- domob at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/36517] Type-spec in array constructor: Invalid error for -std=f2003/f2008

2008-06-18 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-18 13:56 --- Fixed. -- domob at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/36112] Bounds-checking on character length not working for array-constructors

2008-06-17 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-17 20:25 --- Subject: Bug 36112 Author: domob Date: Tue Jun 17 20:24:20 2008 New Revision: 136872 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=136872 Log: 2008-06-17 Daniel Kraft [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR fortran

[Bug fortran/36112] Bounds-checking on character length not working for array-constructors

2008-06-17 Thread domob at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-17 20:26 --- Fixed. -- domob at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW

<    1   2   3   4