This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: [Patch, fortran] PR20880 - Failure to detect procedures encompassing own interface
Tobias,
(checked with --leak-check=full using func_derived_3.f90 as test case):
==18838== 21,836 (3,176 direct, 18,660 indirect) bytes in 36 blocks are
definitely lost in loss record 5 of 9
That is odd isn't it? Look at the fortran; I wonder how it succeeds in
losing that much?
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/interface_3.f90 (revision 0)
+ ! Contributed by
By whom?
The one person whose contributions are so many that he probably doesn't
need naming!
Joost VandeVondele <jv244@cam.ac.uk> <mailto:jv244@cam.ac.uk>
With that addition, is it OK to commit?
The next version of the VALUE patch is regtesting right now.
Many thanks
Paul
- References:
- [Patch, fortran] PR20880 - Failure to detect procedures encompassing own interface
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR20880 - Failure to detect procedures encompassing own interface
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR20880 - Failure to detect procedures encompassing own interface
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR20880 - Failure to detect procedures encompassing own interface
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR20880 - Failure to detect procedures encompassing own interface
- From: François-Xavier Coudert
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR20880 - Failure to detect procedures encompassing own interface
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR20880 - Failure to detect procedures encompassing own interface
- From: François-Xavier Coudert
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR20880 - Failure to detect procedures encompassing own interface
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR20880 - Failure to detect procedures encompassing own interface
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR20880 - Failure to detect procedures encompassing own interface
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR20880 - Failure to detect procedures encompassing own interface