This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
some remarks; it is a bit chaotic since I first didn't see your texi changes. I will have another later.
+ *vl = "values", *p1 = "path1", *p2 = "path2", *com = "command";
[...]
+ add_sym_2 ("link", GFC_ISYM_LINK, NO_CLASS, ACTUAL_NO, BT_INTEGER, di,
+ GFC_STD_GNU, gfc_check_link, NULL, gfc_resolve_link,
+ "path1", BT_CHARACTER, dc, REQUIRED,
+ "path2", BT_CHARACTER, dc, REQUIRED);
Is there any reason behind that you add "p1" above and still use "path1" here?
I might miss something, but I think call UMASK(MASK=a, OLD=o) does not work as OLD= is still not recognized.
- a, BT_CHARACTER, dc, REQUIRED); + "path", BT_CHARACTER, dc, REQUIRED);
Shouldn't be there a constant above like it was done for the others? I don't mind "path" but it is a bit inconsistent.
Ditto: - c, BT_INTEGER, 4, REQUIRED); + "seed", BT_INTEGER, 4, REQUIRED);
Ditto: - c, BT_CHARACTER, dc, REQUIRED); + "string", BT_CHARACTER, dc, REQUIRED); (Doesn't there exist stg already?)o
- c, BT_CHARACTER, dc, REQUIRED, st, BT_INTEGER, di, OPTIONAL);
+ "path", BT_CHARACTER, dc, REQUIRED, st, BT_INTEGER, di, OPTIONAL);
-@code{DTIME(TARRAY, RESULT)} +@code{DTIME(VALUES, TIME)}
I don't mind VALUES=, but I want to point out that both g77 and ifort have TARRAY=
Ditto ETIME, IDATE [such as g77; except that ifort has idate(i,j,k) or idate(iarray)],
LTIME.
Attachment:
intrinsics2.ChangeLog
Description: Binary data
Attachment:
intrinsics2.diff
Description: Binary data
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |