This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: [Patch,Fortran] PR39427/37829 - implement F2003's constructors
- From: Tobias Burnus <burnus at net-b dot de>
- To: gcc patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gfortran <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 17:38:23 +0100
- Subject: Re: [Patch,Fortran] PR39427/37829 - implement F2003's constructors
- References: <CADBECBB.2B34B%rouson@sandia.gov> <4EB6B534.9050602@net-b.de>
Am 06.11.2011 17:26, schrieb Tobias Burnus:
I just realized that my patch email did not come through - however, I
did not get any reject email. Let's try first without patch - it's
available at
http://users.physik.fu-berlin.de/~tburnus/tmp/constructor.diff
I wondered whether the patch exceeded the attachment size - I think it's
around 100 kB. However, even the gipped email (about 20 kB) did not get
through.
Thus, you have to live with the URL above. As I do not know what's the
problem, I cannot really solve it.
Tobias
PS: The patch for the release notes is attached - let's see whether that
patch works.
Index: htdocs/gcc-4.7/changes.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-4.7/changes.html,v
retrieving revision 1.53
diff -u -p -r1.53 changes.html
--- htdocs/gcc-4.7/changes.html 1 Nov 2011 15:15:33 -0000 1.53
+++ htdocs/gcc-4.7/changes.html 6 Nov 2011 15:11:20 -0000
@@ -373,6 +373,14 @@ long double pi = 180_degrees;</pre></blo
print a backtrace to standard error before aborting. It can be
disabled with <code>-fno-backtrace</code>. Note: GNU Fortran does
not support backtracing on all targets.</li>
+ <li>Fortran 2003:
+ <ul>
+ <li>Generic interface name which have the same name as derived types
+ are now supported, which allows to write constructor functions. Note
+ that Fortran does not support static constructor functions; only
+ default initialization or an explicit structure-constructor
+ initialization are available.</li>
+ </ul></li>
<li>Fortran 2008:
<ul>
<li>Support for the <code>DO CONCURRENT</code> construct has been