newbie willing to contribute...

[Pierre-Matthieu anglade]

Hi, I've reviewed your patch and here are suggestions and questions
related to your implementation of complex

intrinsic.c
-I'm not sure what the spec are but in cmplx and dcmplx the second
argument is optional. I may be fine to do the same for complex.
-I had inderstood that complex is a F77 function not a GNU one. ->
make_generic(,,GFC_STD_F77)

iresolve.c
-first if: what if y is of kind complex or char or a shorter real than
the default one?
-is BT_REAL multivalued? I mean you test if (y->ts.type == BT_REAL) .
Is this tru for all kinds of real?
-Finally you've not tested what happens if x is already of kind
complex. May be this is hecked elswhere? Yet for cmplx and cmplx it is
done here.
-If you decide to have the optional y statement you may wan't to
implement it here?

check.c
-here other functions uses the "numeric_check function" then prevent
the complex case. I feel this is safer in the iew of future
development as no ones knows what the future of numeric kinds is made
of. :-)
-same question about the BT_REAL

trans-intrinsic.c
-Here I have not really understood the third statement in the
gfc_conv_intrinsic_cmplx call for the cmplx function. But I would say
that your right as long as you don't allow an absent y argument.
right?

simplify.c
-is it correct to use the default real kind for any integer? For
instance on x86 one can represente exactly long int whith long double.
Can't user await us to use this feature? I mean to have a complex
whose decimal part count at least as many bytes as the integer.

PS: thanks for beeing patient with my questions even if they seems dumb.











On 11/7/05, François-Xavier Coudert <fxcoudert@gmail.com> wrote:
> > And the associated
> > gfc_conv_intrinsic_complex () function, I still get the same problem:
> > complex_ is still not recognized by my f951...
>
> You can have a look at the attached patch (this is the front-end part
> of the patch that I will soon send; the library part is not quite
> finished). Look for "complex" and the related functions to see how I
> checked, simplified and resolved it. Which is probably not perfect, of
> course... suggestions welcome.
>
> By the way, the place I'm locked in (sort of speaking) is the CECAM,
> in Lyon (France). Just after sending the last mail, I went out of the
> computer room for a coffee break, and on the door next to me it was
> written: "Pierre-Matthieu Anglade". I was quite stunned for a few
> seconds :)
>
> Unfortunately, after asking the sysadmin, it appears you left the
> place some time ago.
>
> FX
>
>
>


--
Pierre-Matthieu Anglade