This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Patch, fortran] PR22038, PR25072 and PR28119 - things broken in forall statements
- From: Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
- To: Paul Thomas <paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr>
- Cc: "'fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, patch <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 08:21:42 -0700
- Subject: Re: [Patch, fortran] PR22038, PR25072 and PR28119 - things broken in forall statements
- References: <449ABAA2.5000801@wanadoo.fr>
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 05:43:30PM +0200, Paul Thomas wrote:
>
> 2006-06-22 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
>
> PR fortran/22038
> * match.c (match_forall_iterator): Mark new variables as
> FL_UNKNOWN if the match fails.
>
> PR fortran/28119
> * match.c (gfc_match_forall): Remove extraneous call to
> gfc_match_eos.
>
> PR fortran/25072
> * resolve.c (resolve_code, resolve_function): Rework
> forall_flag scheme so that it is set and has a value of
> 2, when the code->expr (ie. the forall mask) is resolved.
> This is used to change "block" to "mask" in the non-PURE
> error message.
>
> 2006-06-22 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
>
> PR fortran/22038
> PR fortran/28119
> * gfortran.dg/forall_4.f90: New test.
>
> PR fortran/25072
> * gfortran.dg/forall_5.f90: New test.
>
OK.
--
Steve