This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [Patch, Fortran] Check arguments of elemental intrinsic subroutines for conformance
- From: "Paul Richard Thomas" <paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com>
- To: "Daniel Kraft" <d at domob dot eu>
- Cc: "Fortran List" <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 17:25:23 +0200
- Subject: Re: [Patch, Fortran] Check arguments of elemental intrinsic subroutines for conformance
- References: <48F7217C.2020909@domob.eu>
Daniel,
> Is it ok if no regressions occur? What do you think, should I commit now
> and work then on the "real" part of PR 35681 or should I try to do both in a
> single larger patch? I'm fine with both options, although I don't expect
> that there's a significant "dependance" of both problems, so seperate
> patches seem totally fine.
I think that this is good to be committed now. It is close on obvious
and must be done, regardless of the fix for PR35681.
OK for trunk, subject to regtest.
Thanks
Paul
PS As a matter of curiosity, how will you fix PR35681? It clearly
needs a temporary, so how will you trigger it?