This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: Procedure Pointers: a first patch
- From: "Paul Richard Thomas" <paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com>
- To: "Tobias Burnus" <tobias dot burnus at physik dot fu-berlin dot de>
- Cc: fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, "Janus Weil" <jaydub66 at googlemail dot com>
- Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 08:07:09 +0200
- Subject: Re: Procedure Pointers: a first patch
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=47UjbRsAxL2x8MU8dLLaqvM+Iya+is1Tejsf/h/494E=; b=IoSOa/OW+QJ1ZzMEcFTjsTGoAUBzbxx4J9jPF9tb959nafxQovP6pvnQf43J2HggYARH8huz2KZn+/6IwVZc/zkZlXHLtzlPVWjhJu2jPKlx9liUyPrN1ZZFRsWvExnZze5uWta0hQ+6Xy6xGhXfq9k2v9og1y5mYhd4JqE5bgU=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ojj1NhI4pfeVNQJ7pKfd5pjyVgPWNcHptnJdsYrHimqcocdi/IMz+rwwPwm/FXV3oeZOJMIYY+HrpOngmpWBTofFYeIcxHyEOJyUjWa0u4OUGYwtH9AP4AcDKmLkXb4418TzzC2Y70BAW9zyK+0Z8XeWFtXe4H7dnSICAFbDRSA=
- References: <20080508045757.GA19955@physik.fu-berlin.de>
Tobias,
Thanks:
> r133958 | fxcoudert | 2008-04-06 14:17:33 +0200 (So, 06 Apr 2008) | 13 lines
>
> * dump-parse-tree.c: Use fprintf, fputs and fputc instead of
> gfc_status and gfc_status_char. Remove gfc_ prefix of the gfc_show_*
> functions and make them static. Add new gfc_dump_parse_tree
> function.
I'll devise something (better?) to replace them.
> > > For your test case, otoh, I get an ADDR_EXPR on the rhs
Yes, of course - the pointer assignment does that.
With respect to the passing of a procedure reference as an assignment;
I meant to track that through to find out what the actual and dummy
argument symbols have that permit them to function correctly. The
actual argument is a variable expression and yet it gets handled
correctly. It's easier on the "little grey cells" to follow the front
end and copy that - although, doing it from first principles is more
virtuous!
I'll take a look at this a bit later on today.
Cheers
Paul