This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: [Patch, fortran] Derived type extension
- From: "Paul Richard Thomas" <paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com>
- To: salvatore dot filippone at uniroma2 dot it
- Cc: "Tobias Burnus" <burnus at net-b dot de>, Fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:00:09 +0200
- Subject: Re: [Patch, fortran] Derived type extension
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=rYrRLT14Tz9leU0qTjo/Ts2ULTQRWNbmgQ1UiJOacg4=; b=t3OAnOSUzA0ouihEa8e4clGBs2B2FPr+jgXsGtRVGzBdqTCl9HtgHgLmLiuxZdj/1i 0RNm2ybVn44HCEV7nAX+S5Qe0fZUYtLRz14X+r+fuNhQm6+YYE0OswUQg0XswGu+zTqP PjnZBe/OhgKV61AKCs5vnkiCkMF4ELrLzZT5c=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=ugD/3x2GqSmPKe/F3t5ROQG6yJvUQqq4SPAEPERku0Eny6+BhSJmz3qqxIMhn0IykX IB/L5ml/4vfNLx/VGXjVFxz9pOpJHjVIbmePrCBHxT90hkfZp1Jhilseo42Jx7/ds2gA Cr72pgWjCB9h3u+nl7ooWk6RMOhbLsYwhNQvw=
- References: <1217233517.3937.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <488D872F.1090301@net-b.de> <339c37f20807280841h27a134b7y553b481226fc24d1@mail.gmail.com> <1217259988.3937.17.camel@localhost.localdomain>
BTW I forgot to mention that there is a separate patch included with
the derived type extension, which answers the remark about temporaries
being produced in assignments to pointer arrays. Clearly, the
possibility of aliassing means that, in general, the appearance of
pointers on both sides of the assignment means that a temporary must
be produced. However, in the specific case that the same pointer
symbol appears on the lhs and the rhs, aliassing has no effect and the
normal dependency analysis is good. I was going to commit it as
"obvious":-)
Paul
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 5:46 PM, Salvatore Filippone
<salvatore.filippone@uniroma2.it> wrote:
> Il giorno lun, 28/07/2008 alle 17.41 +0200, Paul Richard Thomas ha
> scritto:
>> Dear All,
>>
>> > I also applied his patch this morning to a clean tree with the same Rev.
>> > 138204 and I got no patch failures. (I think I had some fuzzy merges.) The
>> > trunk also successfully bootstrapped and so far (char_eoshift_1.f90)
>> > check-gfortran also shows no problems.
>> >
>> > Thus, I do not know why you had problems and I had none.
>>
>> Nor do I - the patch is based on last night's trunk. Could we be
>> partially tupled?
>>
>> Paul
>
> Never mind, the patch text got corrupted (somehow) while transferring to
> my hard disk.
> Refreshed both source tree and patch file (more carefully this time),
> and now it has bootstrapped.
>
> Thanks
> Salvatore
>
>
--
The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
--Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy