This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH, RFC] fortran [was Re: #pragma GCC unroll support]
- From: Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep dot dot dot nop at gmail dot com>
- To: Mike Stump <mikestump at comcast dot net>
- Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>,gfortran <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2015 13:18:01 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] fortran [was Re: #pragma GCC unroll support]
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <23C2D250-F856-48E2-A460-1FC4674A60FB at comcast dot net> <1422919324-29964-1-git-send-email-rep dot dot dot nop at gmail dot com> <DC7BB889-D077-472C-B0F8-C70505D58FC0 at comcast dot net> <CAC1BbcQqXQgVP=TPFniTb-ELyidGP7M_Gind8+Br-p2dNqsv+A at mail dot gmail dot com> <D7456A9B-4487-4218-8072-DE21D46426E0 at comcast dot net>
On May 28, 2015 2:03:08 PM GMT+02:00, Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net> wrote:
>On May 28, 2015, at 2:02 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
><rep.dot.nop@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Does anybody have a better suggestion?
>>
>> directive not at the start of a loop at %C
>> directive not followed by a loop at %C
>
>I prefer either of these. I have a slight preference for the first.
I've changed the Fortran error to the first locally.
>
>> Mike, did you tweak the one or two things you got from the reviews
>> yet?
>
>Nope.
>
>> ISTM your main patch was not OKed yet nor installed.
>
>Been busy with work. Iâll come back and address the nits that people
>pointed out and see if I can ping it some more and try and get the C++
>bits reviewed.
I take it you're well aware that stage 1 will end in a couple of weeks, and maybe you want to have this in GCC-6, so now would be the perfect time.. :)
Cheers,