This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC 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, fortran] annotate library calls, part 1


On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 6:18 PM, Mikael Morin <mikael.morin@sfr.fr> wrote:
> Le 12.07.2010 16:39, Tobias Burnus a écrit :
>>
>> On 05/25/2010 04:18 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>>>
>>> On 05/12/2010 08:52 PM, Daniel Franke wrote:
>>>
>>>> Attached patch annotates the library calls in trans-decl.c and
>>>> trans-io.c with
>>>> noclobber/noescape attributes. That is, those in trans-io are dummies
>>>> only,
>>>> literally just "....", so somebody who knows the internals can fill them
>>>> in
>>>> easily wherever feasible.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Some comments:
>>>
>>
>> Attached is a re-diffed patch, which contains also fixes the issues I
>> raised during my review.
>> Build and regtested on x86-64-linux.
>> OK for the trunk?
>>
>> Tobias
>
> Hello,
>
> I disagree for ttynam, fdate, ctime.
> ?- ttynam : ".W.." instead of ".WW." :
> ? ? ?as gfc_charlen_type_node (second arg) is not a pointer, there
> ? ? ?should be no spec about it (at least to be consistent with the
> ? ? ?rest of the patch)
> ?- fdate : ".W." instead of ".ww" :
> ? ? ?same reason as above. And there can be no double dereference of a
> ? ? ?simple char pointer.
> ?- ctime : ".W.." instead of ".Rw." :
> ? ? ?same as above. By the way the documentation has the arguments in
> ? ? ?reversed order it seems.
>
> For size1 there is one char missing : ".R." instead of ".R"
>
> For set_args, isn't "..." the same as no spec at all ?

You can omit specs for trailing args, so ".R" is the same as ".R.".  And
yes, "..." is the same as no spec at all (and thus better).

Richard.

> Mikael
>
>


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