This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [Patch, fortran] Inline DOT_PRODUCT

From: Janne Blomqvist <jblomqvi at cc dot hut dot fi>
To: THOMAS Paul Richard 169137 <paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr>
Cc: Paul Thomas <paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 17:44:57 +0200
Subject: Re: [Patch, fortran] Inline DOT_PRODUCT
References: <756DFD3DE8F1D411A59A00306E06E84702C42A12@drfccad.cad.cea.fr>

On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 09:29:27AM +0100, THOMAS Paul Richard 169137 wrote:
> Janne,
> 
> I note that we retain the function name for the majority, if not all, of
> the wholly inline intrinsics.
> 
> >   f->value.function.name =
> >     gfc_get_string (PREFIX("dot_product_%c%d"), 
> > gfc_type_letter (f->ts.type),
> > 		    f->ts.kind);
> > 
> > thing from gfc_resolve_dot_product, since it's not needed anymore and
> > lest somebody gets confused.
> 
> I propose that we leave it in place until we decide what to do with all
> such instances.

OK, I assent.

-- 
Janne Blomqvist

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

References:
- RE: [Patch, fortran] Inline DOT_PRODUCT
  - From: THOMAS Paul Richard 169137

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]