[Bug fortran/42267] interaction between -finit-local-zero and -fno-automatic

2009-12-03 Thread bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 19:16 --- here is a patch against 4.4.1 diff --context --recursive gcc-4.4.1/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h gcc-4.4.1_bud/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h *** gcc-4.4.1/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h2009-02-21 16:25:06.0 -0600 ---

[Bug fortran/42267] interaction between -finit-local-zero and -fno-automatic

2009-12-03 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 20:06 --- That's already fixed for 4.5.0, see PR 41860. Do you think it makes sense to backport the patch to 4.4.x? (Note: 4.5.0 is currently in Stage4 (regression fixes only) - thus the question is how many fixed 4.4.x would

[Bug fortran/42267] interaction between -finit-local-zero and -fno-automatic

2009-12-03 Thread bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 20:21 --- silly me. glad to see we both fixed it the same way :) close with no more action taken ? --bud -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42267

[Bug fortran/42267] interaction between -finit-local-zero and -fno-automatic

2009-12-03 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 20:47 --- (In reply to comment #3) silly me. glad to see we both fixed it the same way :) close with no more action taken ? I am fine with closing it as won't fix, but one could also mark it as duplicate. (Or backport the

[Bug fortran/42267] interaction between -finit-local-zero and -fno-automatic

2009-12-03 Thread rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 21:14 --- If it's not a regression close it as fixed in 4.5. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42267

[Bug fortran/42267] interaction between -finit-local-zero and -fno-automatic

2009-12-03 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 21:19 --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 41860 *** -- burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added