This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PR fortran/87919 patch for -fno-dec-structure
- From: Fritz Reese <fritzoreese at gmail dot com>
- To: mark dot eggleston at codethink dot co dot uk
- Cc: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>, fortran <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2018 10:52:18 -0500
- Subject: Re: PR fortran/87919 patch for -fno-dec-structure
- References: <email@example.com> <20181107152216.GD11625@tucnak> <CAE4aFA=KCh8fWoXPCNyYouB_N4VvwbKOBUCBiSkFs4EV9j3Tfw@mail.gmail.com> <20181107223230.GI11625@tucnak> <CAE4aFAmGo1v1Xe3z05qnweoJkgJiPZ_aL0=zj7eOiVXwhzOncw@mail.gmail.com> <20181108175357.GR11625@tucnak> <CAE4aFAn_WrFzWco6V5kZJvW19ZgpEqyiGaw8j36n5wX34jW0gA@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> I think more than enough time passed, do you plan to commit to trunk now?
> Note, small adjustment will be needed for the addition of flag_dec_include
> in set_dec_flags.
Jakub- Sorry, yes. I've had other priorities the past few weeks here,
but I just committed r266745 adjusted for -fdec-include.
> I'm currently using this patch (pending it being committed) and have
> some pending patches that use it.
> I can use the old method of setting dec options for the time being and
> PR fortran/87919 will have to be modified accordingly.
Sorry again for the delay. It is committed now, so you may use the
new-style option setting. Thanks in advance for your upcoming patches.
> I note that in gcc/fortran/options the comment preceding
> set_default_std_flags it says:
> "Keep in sync with libgfortran/runtime/compile_options.c
> and in libgfortran/runtime/compile_options.c preceding
> init_compile_options it says:
> "Keep in sync with gcc/fortran/options.c (gfc_init_options)."
> I think this should have (set_default_std_flags) instead of
> (gfc_init_options) and they are not in sync.
The first comment (above set_default_std_flags) is also present before
gfc_init_options, which is technically the routine that should mirror
init_compile_options. Since set_default_std_flags is a subroutine of
gfc_init_options, it should also sync with the std flags setting in
init_compile_options, so I don't think any of the comments are
incorrect. However the symmetry may be more obvious if the std flags
setting from init_compile_options was in a subroutine (named similarly
to set_default_std_flags), then the comments on the default standard
flags could reference each other.
That being said, it does appear the default standard flags are out of
sync, as you mentioned... Not sure if this is worth a PR but it's
certainly worth fixing. Seems it was introduced when f2015 was renamed
to f2018 in r255761.