This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Patch ping**3
- From: Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
- To: Tobias Schl?ter <tobias dot schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de>
- Cc: GCC Fortran mailing list <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, patch <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 09:31:15 -0700
- Subject: Re: Patch ping**3
- References: <42501754.1030902@physik.uni-muenchen.de>
On Sun, Apr 03, 2005 at 06:18:28PM +0200, Tobias Schl?ter wrote:
>
> I'll have a little bit of time next week so I would really appreciate if those
> would get approved by then. I also think that the first patch might be
> considered release-critical (well, you know ...), as without it gfortran can't
> be used as drop-in replacement for g77 in the presence of precompiled libraries.
>
> 2005-03-08 [gfortran] Fix PR 20178: Implement g77 / f2c calling conventions
> mail here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-03/msg00126.html
> patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-03/msg00129.html
> one-line fix here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-03/msg00163.html
>
> 2005-03-05 [gfortran] More type-safety issues
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-03/msg00071.html
> (the part which removes the fold_convert doesn't work with the g77 calling
> conventions, but I think the should remove support for the NULL rhs anyway,
> and that part is independent)
>
I've already said that the second half of the second patch is
accepted (ie., remove support for the NULL rhs).
As to the g77 compatibity issue, has anyone actually tested this?
ISTR that Steven Johnson complained bittered about the lack of
compatibility. Have you contacted him to see if your patch
solves his problem?
--
Steve