This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH, fortran] Interoperability with C int128_t types
- From: FX <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>
- To: "Sa Liu" <SALIU at de dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: "Bernhard Fischer" <rep dot dot dot nop at gmail dot com>, "Fortran List" <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:07:52 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH, fortran] Interoperability with C int128_t types
- References: <OF4336A9CE.6A5BA92E-ONC125741E.003AAF65-C125741E.003C32E4@de.ibm.com> <B7608842-8DA7-4235-B1CD-F7AA1D69BCF6@gmail.com> <OF3BDAB2D8.F151E864-ONC125742C.0034A070-C125742C.00359BCC@de.ibm.com> <20080415111800.GA25796@mx.loc> <OF5F173530.309A95A9-ONC125742D.0034D986-C125742D.0034F851@de.ibm.com>
> And also the ChangeLogs and texi changes.
Oh, I only saw that mail after I sent my review. The doc changes are
fine, but I'd change the wording to make it even more obvious: as
128-bit ISO_C_BINDING integer kinds are not a currently existing
extension, we want to avoid surprising people. Maybe saying it in a
different paragraph:
"In addition to the integer named constants required by the Fortran
2003 standard, GNU Fortran provides as an extension named constants
for the 128-bit integer types supported by the C compiler: C_INT128_T,
... [write here the full list]".
Then, I'd add a new column to the table so that extensions are more
clearly labeled: like, using "Extension" as a column header and
putting an "Ext." for the new symbols.
Regards,
FX
--
FX Coudert
http://www.homepages.ucl.ac.uk/~uccafco/