https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
--- Comment #10 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Jun 5 20:40:35 2015
New Revision: 224171
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224171&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-06-03 Russell Whitesides
Steven G. Kargl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: kargl
Date: Fri Jun 5 16:54:53 2015
New Revision: 224159
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=224159&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-06-03 Russell Whitesides
Steven G. Kargl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
--- Comment #8 from russelldub at gmail dot com ---
> May be the patch should be submitted to fort...@gcc.gnu.org (for next stage1).
I'd be happy if this could be resolved. Should I submit or someone with more
clout among the gfortran maintainer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Is 40958 a duplicate of this PR or is there something else lurking?
AFAIU pr40958 comment 13, Janne was anticipating possible exponential behaviors
from a rather theoretical point of view. This PR i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I have doubled the number of modules to get the following results
gcc version 4.8.5
21.907u 0.994s 0:23.00 99.5%0+0k 0+22io 3pf+0w
-rw-r--r-- 1 dominiq staff 2923 Mar 9 10:59 module0.mod
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
--- Comment #4 from russelldub at gmail dot com ---
Any hope for movement on this? I've made some attempts at diagnosing the
issue, but not sure why equivalences behave differently than other statements
in the modules.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
--- Comment #3 from russelldub at gmail dot com ---
Any hope for movement on this? I've made some attempts at diagnosing the
issue, but not sure why equivalences behave differently than other statements
in the modules.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60780
--- Comment #1 from russelldub at gmail dot com ---
> Equivalence statements in equivalence statements
Should read "Equivalence statements in modules". Apologies.
11 matches
Mail list logo