Re: [patch, fortran] Implement constant-folding for TRANSFER intrinsic.

[Tobias Schlüter <tobias dot schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de>]

Hi Paul,

thank you very much.  I don't have time to give this another thorough 
look, but I still have one question.

Paul Thomas wrote:
> > > My inclination would be to do the cosmetic and small fixes to this 
> > > and go ahead and commit it and then work on the 
> > > alternate-character-set hypotheticality and the derived-type spacing 
> > > stuff in follow-up patches, since AFAIK this doesn't cause anything 
> > > to break that worked previously.  But that's not a strong 
> > > inclination, and I'll let Paul and FX make the call on that.  :)
> I agree.
> > I think we should assert that we're not dealing with derived types, 
> > since otherwise we would leave the user with a potentially 
> > hard-to-find error.  Apart from that, I agree with this course of action.
> I have fixed derived types.  Instead of assuming that the derived types 
> are packed, I have used gfc_typenode_for_spec to produce a tree type and 
> then use the offset values in the components.  I believe that this is 
> robust.
...
> + size_t
> + gfc_target_expr_size (gfc_expr *e)
> + {
...
> +     case BT_DERIVED:
> +       ctr = e->value.constructor;
> +       for (;ctr; ctr = ctr->next)
> + 	{
> + 	  gcc_assert (ctr->expr != NULL);
> + 	  expr_size += gfc_target_expr_size (ctr->expr);
> + 	}
> +       return expr_size;
> +     default:
> +       gfc_internal_error ("Invalid expression in gfc_target_expr_size.");
> +       return 0;
> +     }
> + }

Why don't you need to do the gfc_typenode_for_spec thing here as well? 
I may well be missing something, given that I only glaced over this.

Cheers,
- Tobi