Re: Allocatable components (was Re: [gfortran,patch] Fix wrong-code for ASSOCIATED)

[Paul Thomas <paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr>]

Erik,

> While you don't say so explicitely, I gather that these trees would be
> something that the binary keeps track of at runtime (rather than
> something the compiler does at compile time)?
>  
Yes indeed.

> Also, what are your plans for the "programming interface" to this
> scheme.  Would it be possible to have person X working on (other aspects
> of) allocatable components using the current memory management scheme,
> while person Y implements this new scheme, and then just plug in the new
> scheme when it's done with small or no changes to the code written by
> X?  Or do you think it's better to first implement the new scheme, and
> continue with the allocatable components stuff only when it's done?
>
>
>        
The former - the present null and releasing of allocatable components is 
servicable and works; it might even be more effective than the scheme 
that I am proposing! There will be a trade-off between good performance 
with small numbers of allocatable components and small numbers actually 
allocated in an arbitrarily large number of candidates. It might even be 
wise to have an option to switch between them?

Regards

Paul