Re: [Patch, fortran] PR25289 Cannot handle record numbers large than huge(0_4)

[Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at verizon dot net>]

Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 08:21:12AM +0200, FX Coudert wrote:
> > I don't have time right now to review that patch. Here are my comments:
>
> Jerry, I'm in the same boat with fx, but I  should be able 
> to read through the code Saturday.  Perhaps, we can get
> in touch on IRC in the afternoon.
>
> > > This patch 
> > > borrows code from trans-types.c to determine whether or not a target 
> > > supports integer 8 or not.  A new function is added to make this 
> > > determination.
> > I think we should use a constant to store that integer kind defined as 
> > "8 if integer(8) exists and 4 otherwise", to avoid calling a function 
> > each time we need it. We already have a constant gfc_max_integer_kind in 
> > place, we could either
> >
> >  - use that gfc_max_integer_kind, because it is also known from the 
> > library, as GFC_INTEGER_LARGEST
> >
> >  - use similar code than the one defining gfc_max_integer_kind to 
> > define gfc_large_integer_kind as "8 if possible, 4 otherwise"
>
> You definitely don't want to use gfc_max_integer_kind.  This
> is integer*16 on most (if not all) 64 bit architectures.  I 
> think we should go with the second option, but with a more
> descriptive name, perhaps, gfc_record_integer_kind.
Yes, I agree we should not use gfc_max_integer_kind.  I have the second option 
working with gfc_record_int_kind.

I will do some more testing here. (I found the extern declarations in 
gfortran.h, doh!)

Steve, I will look for you on IRC if I can Saturday.

Jerry