This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Patch, fortran] PR83076 - [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_deallocate_scalar_with_status, at fortran/trans.c:1598
Hi Damian,
Does breaking binary compatibility simply mean that CAF codes will need to be recompiled (which is fine)
Well... not really. We are not supposed to break binary compatibility
in a release. For gcc-8, we have greater freedom because we had to
do it anyway.
Now, the interesting question is the impact. If we break binary
compatibilty for something that never worked anyway or was useless, or
something that was broken by a gcc-7 regression, I think we're fine.
If not, well... one possible decision would be to wait for gcc-8 to
fix this.
> or does it mean that there will need to be work done on OpenCoarrays
to support the changes
This, I don't know, never having looked at the OpenCoarrays source.
Regards
Thomas
- References:
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR83076 - [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_deallocate_scalar_with_status, at fortran/trans.c:1598
- From: Dominique d'Humières
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR83076 - [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_deallocate_scalar_with_status, at fortran/trans.c:1598
- From: Paul Richard Thomas
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR83076 - [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_deallocate_scalar_with_status, at fortran/trans.c:1598
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR83076 - [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_deallocate_scalar_with_status, at fortran/trans.c:1598
- From: Paul Richard Thomas
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR83076 - [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_deallocate_scalar_with_status, at fortran/trans.c:1598
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR83076 - [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_deallocate_scalar_with_status, at fortran/trans.c:1598
- From: Paul Richard Thomas
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR83076 - [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_deallocate_scalar_with_status, at fortran/trans.c:1598
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR83076 - [8 Regression] ICE in gfc_deallocate_scalar_with_status, at fortran/trans.c:1598