Re: [Fortran-Experiments]: patch

["Christopher D. Rickett" <crickett at lanl dot gov>]

> Christopher D. Rickett schrieb:
> > > > did you apply your proposed patch for bind(c) dummy procedures?
> > > Yes, I applied the big patch.
> And I read here too fast: No, I reverted all my patches before applying
> your patch.
> If I re-add my patch, it works. (It was not completely clear to me
> whether you patch included something like that already.)

no, i did not add it since you had sent out the proposed patch.  i figured 
i'd get it the next time i updated.

> > also, i wanted comments about binding labels in general.  right now, i
> > only consider the binding label field if the symbol is BIND(C) or from
> > the iso_c_binding module.  however, if the compiler wants to assign a
> > binding label w/o being either of these, then i can simply consider
> > the binding label if it's non-null.  this should easily allow setting
> > of binding labels for library routines.  does anyone have objections
> > or comments?
> I'm not sure whether I understood this. What do you mean by "if the
> compiler wants to assign a binding label" and "consider the binding
> label if it's non-null". How do you get a binding label without using
> bind(c,name="label") ?

the idea is to allow for binding labels for internal compiler use without 
having to make the symbol bind(c).  right now i do that for some of the 
iso_c_binding procedures.  i thought it could be useful for the compiler 
to be able to set a binding label if it wanted to.

> In any case I'm slightly opposed to adding compiler-specific extensions,
> but maybe it makes sense after I understood the proposal.

i don't think this is really an extension since it's not available to the 
user; i was just thinking that the compiler could do it for itself 
internally.  is that more clear?

Chris