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] Fix PR 45786, operator == versus .eq. in public/private

From: Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at netcologne dot de>
To: Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
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: Sun, 29 May 2011 20:42:20 +0200
Subject: Re: [patch, fortran] Fix PR 45786, operator == versus .eq. in public/private
References: <4DE25376.7000803@netcologne.de> <20110529164411.GA44487@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>

Hi Steve,

On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 04:08:54PM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote:
Regression-tested on trunk. OK for trunk and 4.6? What about 4.5?


OK for trunk and 4.6.  If it applies cleanly to 4.5 and
passes regression testing, then you can also commit to
4.5 at your discretion.

Committed to trunk:

Sende          fortran/decl.c
Sende          fortran/gfortran.h
Sende          fortran/interface.c
Hinzufügen     testsuite/gfortran.dg/operator_7.f90
Übertrage Daten ....
Revision 174412 übertragen.

Will commit to 4.6 in a couple of days, and check out 4.5 like you said.

Thanks for the review!

Thomas

References:
- [patch, fortran] Fix PR 45786, operator == versus .eq. in public/private
  - From: Thomas Koenig
- Re: [patch, fortran] Fix PR 45786, operator == versus .eq. in public/private
  - From: Steve Kargl

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