dropped (unless mandatory).
Cheers,
Gilles
On 4/12/2019 4:53 PM, Bader, Reinhold wrote:
Dear Gilles,
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Gilles Gouaillardet
Gesendet: Freitag, 12. April 2019 02:25
An: Bader, Reinhold ; Paul Richard Thomas
; fort...@gcc.gnu.org; gcc-patches
Betreff: Re: AW
Reinhold,
Thanks for the insights !
That means there is currently an other issue since copy-in is performed
even if the argument is declared as ASYNCHRONOUS.
I gave the copy-in mechanism some more thoughts, and as a library
developers, I can clearly see a need *not* to do that
on a
Thanks Paul,
I tried the patch and it does fix CFI_is_contigous()
There is still an issue with INTENT(IN)
For example, if we declare
integer :: buf(0:1025,0:1025)
and then
call foo(buf(1:1024,1:1024)
in which foo declares buf as INTENT(IN)
You previously explained buf will be copied
