This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patches,fortran] Add POINTER INTENT(*) support (PR29624)
- From: Paul Thomas <paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr>
- To: Tobias Burnus <burnus at net-b dot de>
- Cc: "'fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 17:04:44 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patches,fortran] Add POINTER INTENT(*) support (PR29624)
- References: <457E9077.80304@net-b.de> <4585C0DB.6030506@net-b.de> <459257EA.7080101@net-b.de>
Tobias,
Regression tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.
OK with a couple of questions/niggles....
+/* Given a symbol of a formal argument list and an expression, see if
+ their intents are compatible. Returns nonzero if compatible,
+ zero if not compatible. */
+
"Given a symbol of a formal argument list and an expression, return
non-zero if their intents are compatible, zero otherwise." is a bit more
concise.
- return gfc_notify_std (standard, "In the selected standard, %s attribute "
- "conflicts with %s attribute at %L", a1, a2,
- where);
+ return gfc_notify_std (standard, "%s: %s attribute with %s attribute "
+ "at %L",
+ (standard == GFC_STD_F2003)
+ ? "Fortran 2003" : "Not in the selected standard",
+ a1, a2, where);
Is the language support OK with this? I seem to recall that we had some
problems with computed messages.
+ /* Check INTENT(IN), unless the object itself of higher up in the
+ hierarchy is a pointer. */
Not only is the symtax a bit odd but I think that , "unless the object
itself is the component or sub-component of a pointer." is clearer.
+
+ /* Check INTENT(IN), unless the object itself of higher up in the
+ hierarchy is a pointer. */
ditto
+ /* Check INTENT(IN), unless an object higher up in the
+ hierarchy is a pointer. */
ditto**2
Thanks!
Paul