This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: [PATCH, fortran] Interoperability with C int128_t types
- From: Bernhard Fischer <rep dot dot dot nop at gmail dot com>
- To: Sa Liu <SALIU at de dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: FX Coudert <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>, Fortran List <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 13:18:01 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, fortran] Interoperability with C int128_t types
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=NBo2KAtclkAhLY99AJ7H3U1dQjkjCuXNqvVKOyKM91w=; b=lHSqsa+3WjMQa9nYKADsr0LYsKjHedsSKm81Nv7/sx8wQtWA5bQZcppB+r0bKSkx6rOu819Eoji2faBsH9ndJzvvkDWaZl8Kk74go1dM+9m6+klp1jo1DvLgwIvlafpgVHU1GtSgeFuGAFF3I0XyUIKXnXyj+ufYYMJuwOp73Hs=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=aOsyNcKiJELeBUMcgkDG+fhNFWrGd/KV6axyTzlYaSFnnRcOkPCRMd2kO7kO7XXM1+GunSZgnrRgMFDsO7OvqMczCuQYNEYjEhVtAneg4zdMQGxTPal9XppWzoeXfXMCEZFbTz2dCB7fniSkjeZrUdz8g/zQtRR+orJjOtwnNHM=
- References: <OF4336A9CE.6A5BA92E-ONC125741E.003AAF65-C125741E.003C32E4@de.ibm.com> <B7608842-8DA7-4235-B1CD-F7AA1D69BCF6@gmail.com> <OF3BDAB2D8.F151E864-ONC125742C.0034A070-C125742C.00359BCC@de.ibm.com>
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 11:45:32AM +0200, Sa Liu wrote:
>Sorry for the late response. How about this patch?
>On platforms that do not support 128-bit integer, it will behave the same
>as if -std=f2003 is given.
>The patch has been regtested on spu-linux.
>
>Thanks!
>Sa
>Index: gcc/gcc/fortran/iso-c-binding.def
>===================================================================
>--- gcc.orig/gcc/fortran/iso-c-binding.def
>+++ gcc/gcc/fortran/iso-c-binding.def
>@@ -42,44 +42,57 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.
> /* The arguments to NAMED_*CST are:
> -- an internal name
> -- the symbol name in the module, as seen by Fortran code
>- -- the value it has, for use in trans-types.c */
>+ -- the value it has, for use in trans-types.c
>+ -- the standard that support this type */
I'm not a native speaker, but i think this should either read
"the standards that support" or "the standard that supports".
To me, the former sounds more accurate iff we or several standards
together (in the future).
The same applies to the other occurances in this proposed patch (which i
stopped reading here).