newbie willing to contribute...

[Steve Kargl]

On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 03:51:29PM +0100, Fran?ois-Xavier Coudert wrote:
> > I've already looked at CMPLX.
> > In fact I thought I had finished to implement COMPLEX...
> 
> Ouch! This is a collision warning from the gfortran radar. This
> message is automatically sent because a collision between gfortran
> developers is happening :)

As Winnie-the-Pooh would say: "Oh, bother." :-)

The missing intrinsics are the perfect starter project.  FX,
wasn't your first patch for some missing intrinsics. :-) 
OTOH, I guess at some point we'll run out of missing intrinsics.

> As a matter of fact, I'm stuck in a hotel with no wireless access
> around and nothing else to do than writing gfortran code (or at least,
> nothing else as tempting). Therefore, I'm trying to get the last g77
> intrinsics implemented. I've already done COMPLEX, XOR and other
> logical functions, FTELL, FGETC/FGET/FPUTC/FPUT. Sorry for not stating
> this earlier, I hadn't had time to read the discussion through.
> 
> I intend to submit a patch in the next 48 hours, with the intrinsics above.

Cool.  I'll review the patch when ready.

> > Can you give me an hint about that?
> 
> I think COMPLEX is not a usual intrinsic, in the sense that is does
> not call a library function called PREFIX(complex). Rather, it should
> be handled in trans-intrinsics to build the tree expression that goes
> well (see cmplx implentation in that file).
> 
> This is a bit trickier than the usual beginner project (but it's very
> interesting, and it's a good way to discover the front-end trees).
> 

PMA, don't throw your changes out.  Wait for FX's patch
and compare what you have done with his patches.  Although
you can't approve his patch for inclusion into gfortran, 
you can review and offer comments and corrections.  This
is another way to get involved and start to understand 
the internals of gfortran.

-- 
Steve