This is the mail archive of the fortran@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GNU Fortran 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] PR29642 - Fortran 2003: VALUE Attribute (pass by value)

From: FX Coudert <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>
To: Tobias Burnus <burnus at net-b dot de>
Cc: Paul Thomas <paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr>, Fortran List <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 08:55:28 +0100
Subject: Re: [Patch, fortran] PR29642 - Fortran 2003: VALUE Attribute (pass by value)
References: <45599379.4010206@wanadoo.fr> <455E16F8.60806@wanadoo.fr> <455E47C8.8080309@net-b.de>

+     if ((a%x /= b%x) .or. (a%c /= b%c)) dtne = .TRUE.
+   if (r /= 42.0) call abort ()
+   if (z /= (-99.0, 199.0)) call abort ()
+     if (r /= 42.0) call abort ()
+     if (r /= 99.0) call abort ()
+     if (z /= (-99.0, 199.0)) call abort ()
+     if (z /= (77.0, -42.0)) call abort ()

Please replace the real/complex tests by something like
    abs(a%x-b%x) > epsilon(a%x)
etc. Here it accidentally works, though.

I have to say that I differ here. There's no arithmetic done on the variables here, so the values should really be exactly the same, and a simple /= operator is, IMHO, sufficient.

Thanks Tobias for reviewing Paul's patch,
FX

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR29642 - Fortran 2003: VALUE Attribute (pass by value)
  - From: Tobias Burnus

References:
- [Patch, fortran] PR29642 - Fortran 2003: VALUE Attribute (pass by value)
  - From: Paul Thomas
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR29642 - Fortran 2003: VALUE Attribute (pass by value)
  - From: Paul Thomas
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR29642 - Fortran 2003: VALUE Attribute (pass by value)
  - From: Tobias Burnus

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