[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment with non-constant start values

2013-08-09 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36928 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment with non-constant start values

2010-05-31 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #14 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-06-01 05:30 --- Fixed for the constant case. Still to do, but much harder: A case like a(n,m,2) = a(n+1,m,2). Unassigning myself for now. -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2010-05-31 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #13 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-31 20:22 --- Subject: Bug 36928 Author: tkoenig Date: Mon May 31 20:22:10 2010 New Revision: 160085 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=160085 Log: 2010-05-31 Thomas Koenig PR fortran/36928

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2010-05-22 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #12 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-22 21:20 --- (In reply to comment #11) > You probably mean "if abs(la-lb) mod gcd(sa, sb) != 0" (assuming > x(lb:ub:sb);-). Yes, I had this reversed when I wrote this. Note that if I am not mistaken, this result extends to

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2010-05-22 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #11 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-05-22 10:50 --- > For x(la:ua:sa) = x(lb,ub,sb), there can be no collision > > if abs(la-lb) mod gcd(sa, sb) == 0 > > where gcd is the greatest common divisor. You probably mean "if abs(la-lb) mod gcd(sa, sb) != 0" (assuming x(lb:u

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2010-05-22 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-22 10:11 --- I've gotten a bit further with this. For x(la:ua:sa) = x(lb,ub,sb), there can be no collision if abs(la-lb) mod gcd(sa, sb) == 0 where gcd is the greatest common divisor. This will at least fix the test case fr

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2010-05-16 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-16 10:30 --- It makes sense to do this in the frontend. The worst thing is when the frontend creates array temporaries - those are really really hard to get rid of in the middle-end. There are basically two (or maybe two and a

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2010-05-16 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-16 09:00 --- Richard, what do you think of this? Does it make sense to do the dependency analysis in the front end? Does Graphite (about which I know next to nothing, I admit) have the necessary infrastructure to detect the dep

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2010-05-15 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-15 18:13 --- I suggest you give a chat to Richard Guenther who seems quite up on the optimisation aspects of things. If we are creating a temporary in the front end I think that would be the least optimal approach. -- ht

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2010-05-15 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #6 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-05-15 18:01 --- > If we can improve dependency analysis in the front end, where we (potentially) > have some more information, it should not hurt the middle-end. > > OTOH, if somebody is already doing work in this direction, it woul

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2010-05-15 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-15 17:30 --- (In reply to comment #4) > > It is an interesting problem. > > Should not it be handled by the middle-end, possibly with the help of > graphite? If we can improve dependency analysis in the front end, where we (po

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2010-05-15 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-05-15 17:05 --- > It is an interesting problem. Should not it be handled by the middle-end, possibly with the help of graphite? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36928

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2010-05-15 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-15 15:55 --- I'm working on this (designing an algorithm so far). It is an interesting problem. -- tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2010-05-09 Thread dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-09 20:28 --- Still valid with: gcc version 4.6.0 20100509 (experimental) (GCC) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36928

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2008-11-14 Thread jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk
-- jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed

[Bug fortran/36928] array temporary for interleaving assignment

2008-07-25 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-25 08:42 --- See also PR 36915. This is one of the items where the middle-end array expressions would help (see links in PR 36915). The ME array expr. support is planned for 4.5. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id