gfortran links to bug lists

[Tobias Schlüter]

Brooks Moses wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 09:48:04AM +0200, Daniel Franke wrote:
>> 2007/7/19, Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle@verizon.net>:
>>>> I find it a bit concerning that the focus has shifted so far to F2003
>>>> that I have had to resurrect my own Bugzilla lists.  Is this really what
>>>> we want to be doing right now?  If so, OK, I'll plough my own furrow but
>>>> I'd rather that we all pulled together.
>>> I agree we need to focus on the bug list.
>> Are there any features and corner cases of F95 that are not
>> implemented yet? Do we have any means to track the overall progress?
> 
> To my knowledge, the TRANSFER simplification Paul Thomas and I worked on
> and the related work on overlapping initializers that Paul did were the
> last unimplemented bits of F95.  At the least, I think they're the last
> things that have "unimplemented" error messages.
> 
> There may be corner cases that are buggy, though, certainly.

Paul mentioned this upthread, and I'm not sure if one should call this 
"corner cases" and "bugs", or simply "major design definciency" that 
leads to "unimplemented F95 features", but since it seems to somehow 
have escaped the discussion: our array descriptor format doesn't allow 
implementation of the whole of Fortran 95, because the strides are not 
byte-sized.  Bug reports due to this are e.g. PRs 29396 and 30625.

> (Dissertation to the committee three days ago; defense next week....)

Congrats on the first part, good luck for the second.

Cheers,
- Tobi