https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64290
Ev Drikos changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #49990|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99183
--- Comment #1 from Ev Drikos ---
It turns out that the title isn't very accurate. It's a compile time error!
Ev. Drikos
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99183
Bug ID: 99183
Summary: Incompatible Runtime types
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88735
--- Comment #6 from Ev Drikos ---
(In reply to martin from comment #5)
> Hi Ev,
>
> the testcase is actually derived from a smart pointer implementation (where
> i is the reference count, shared between all smart pointers [hence
> allocatable
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88735
Ev Drikos changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #50129|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88735
--- Comment #3 from Ev Drikos ---
Created attachment 50129
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50129=edit
Test Case
IMHO, a simple workaround might be a deep copy in 'gfc_trans_scalar_assign' if
the LHS is finalizable (not
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95038
Ev Drikos changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drikosev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64290
--- Comment #5 from Ev Drikos ---
Created attachment 49990
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49990=edit
realloc_class_8.f95
Hello,
Having seen a Note in F2018 draft, specifically
10.2.1.3 Interpretation of intrinsic
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64290
--- Comment #4 from Ev Drikos ---
Hello,
There are some open PRs related to elemental finalisers. Having seen
how you reallocate arrays, I'd the impression that the functionality
for polymorphic entities would had a similar design. As one may
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92976
Ev Drikos changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drikosev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92065
--- Comment #24 from Ev Drikos ---
The hack outlined in comment #23 had raised an error
with coarrays that turns to be an uncovered error:
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.fortran/c/E3RGBJZt4ag/m/MTXpOqPgAwAJ
In short, the hack has no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91648
Ev Drikos changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drikosev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92065
--- Comment #23 from Ev Drikos ---
Created attachment 49841
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49841=edit
Test Cases Only
Hello,
I'm wondering whether a quick and dirty hack
that would keep derived type data per class
array
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92065
--- Comment #22 from Ev Drikos ---
Created attachment 49836
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49836=edit
module + driver
A slightly modified example gives me the impression
that some local objects that are class arrays share
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92065
Ev Drikos changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drikosev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #17
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96012
Ev Drikos changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drikosev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70863
Ev Drikos changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drikosev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68778
Ev Drikos changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drikosev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98016
--- Comment #7 from Ev Drikos ---
Created attachment 49659
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49659=edit
attachment for pr98016-07
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #6)
> Created attachment 49645 [details]
> Fix for the PR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
--- Comment #10 from Ev Drikos ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #9)
> I think the two attached patches are not pertinent...
Possibly, you are right. I have no access to the
particular source code.
> I get
>
> 8 | call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
--- Comment #8 from Ev Drikos ---
Created attachment 49301
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49301=edit
test-case with a module
Hello again,
Here is another test-case with a module.
It's a question if this should fail or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97224
Ev Drikos changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||drikosev at gmail dot com
--- Comment #7
22 matches
Mail list logo
