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] PR fortran/78033 -- This was a REAL pain

From: Dominique d'Humières <dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr>
To: Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
Cc: fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches List <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 23:51:24 +0200
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/78033 -- This was a REAL pain
Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
References: <246CBE73-9F4E-4898-810A-CA1C3F5EE0E9@lps.ens.fr> <20161022144242.GA34781@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>

> Le 22 oct. 2016 à 16:42, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> a écrit :
> 
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 02:22:47PM +0200, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
>> See comments in pr78033. What are the plans to handle pr54730?
>> 
> 
> Not sure what you mean.  I certainly will not remove
> Mikael's checkpointing in the array constructor code,
> leaving array_constructor_43.f90 broken.

Well I have applied the patch at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-10/msg00156.html and noticed the failures of the test array_constructor_42.f90 and those in pr54730.

So more explicit questions:

Is the patch the right one?
If yes, what will be done for the failures?

TIA

Dominique

> -- 
> Steve

References:
- Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/78033 -- This was a REAL pain
  - From: Dominique d'Humières
- Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/78033 -- This was a REAL pain
  - From: Steve Kargl

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