--- Comment #12 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-30 16:56
---
Subject: Bug 35993
Author: tkoenig
Date: Wed Apr 30 16:56:01 2008
New Revision: 134830
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=134830
Log:
2008-04-30 Thomas Koenig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-28 21:03 ---
This is not critical in the gcc sense - I would change it back to normal if I
were you. After all, this feature of F95 has never worked correctly:)
Cheers
Paul
--
--- Comment #10 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-28 21:34
---
Created an attachment (id=15542)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=15542action=view)
proposed patch
This fixes the test case.
Regression-test and submission probably tomorrow.
--
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-29 03:14
---
The patch fixes sum, product, and minloc. Regression tests OK on x86-64.
Thanks for patch.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 06:14
---
I am also seeing this same issue with all the array intrinsics that accept a
mask if it is scalar and .false. At this point I am calling for some second
opinions here. The bad code is in the s version of each of
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 06:17
---
I am going to un assign myself. I think we need a team effort here.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 08:50 ---
I'll look at this (and handle the m4 parts, which I am getting
to be good at), but not today.
The good part is that we'll only need to fix this in a single
place, the definition of SCALAR_ARRAY_FUNCTION in
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-26 12:52
---
Looking at product.m4 as an example:
--- snip ---
MASKED_ARRAY_FUNCTION(1,
` result = 1;',
` if (*msrc)
result *= *src;')
SCALAR_ARRAY_FUNCTION(1)
`#endif'
The SCALAR_ARRAY_FUNCTION is empty. It needs
