This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Patch, Fortran] Replace intmax_type_node by INTMAX_TYPE
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- To: fxcoudert at gmail dot com
- Cc: Fortran List <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Tobias Burnus <burnus at net-b dot de>
- Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 13:44:37 +0200 (CEST)
- Subject: Re: [Patch, Fortran] Replace intmax_type_node by INTMAX_TYPE
- References: <135C3FE1-7D5C-4EA6-BA87-0C1A2CCD54FE@gmail.com>
On Sat, 30 May 2009, FX wrote:
>> FX's patch to use stdint.h has caused 18 regressions on FreeBSD,
>> because GCC apparently does not recognize that FreeBSD has a perfectly
>> fine /usr/include/stdint.h.
> I think it's unfair to Joseph to criticize him for providing that,
> unless you have a constructive alternative to propose ("patches are
> reviewed on the basis of their technical merit").
If anything, FreeBSD developers/users could be criticized for not
getting their act together and taking better care of FreeBSD support
in GCC.
> Regarding the patch: I don't think this patch should introduce any
> new failure, as on targets such as FreeBSD the middle-end defaults
> (gcc/defaults.h) are the same as the definition we used in the
> front-end.
What I find comparing the snapshot from two days ago
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2009-05/msg02642.html
with my currently testing patch with stdint.h support on FreeBSD is
that we go from
# of expected passes 30253
# of unexpected failures 19
# of expected failures 20
# of unsupported tests 242
to
# of expected passes 30303
# of unexpected failures 1
# of expected failures 20
# of unsupported tests 250
as far as Fortran is concerned. My tests are still running, but expect
to see a working patch being submitted in a few hours. :-)
Gerald