[patch, fortran] Load scalar intent-in variables at the beginning of procedures

[Janne Blomqvist]

On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 8:00 PM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
<rep.dot.nop@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 19 November 2019 23:54:55 CET, Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> wrote:
> >Am 19.11.19 um 11:39 schrieb Bernhard Reutner-Fischer:
> >> +      char name[GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN + 1];
> >> +      snprintf (name, GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN, "__dummy_%d_%s", var_num++,
> >> +                f->sym->name);
> >> +
> >> +      if (gfc_get_sym_tree (name, ns, &symtree, false) != 0)
> >>
> >> (I) you should + sizeof(__dummy__) + 10 for unsigned long %d or the
> >like.
> >
> >GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN is the maximum length of a gfortran symbol. AFAIK,
>
> This is only true for user-provided names in the source code.
>
> Think e.g. class names as can be seen in the dumps..

We have GFC_MAX_MANGLED_SYMBOL_LEN for that. *Insert my standard pet
peeve rant that we should use heap allocated unlimited length strings
for these rather than copying stack allocated strings around, or
preferable a symbol table*

> >it
> >is not possible to use a longer symbol name than that, so it needs to
> >be
> >truncated. Uniqueness of the variable name is guaranteed by the var_num
> >variable.
> >
> >If the user puts dummy arguments Supercalifragilisticexpialidociousa
> >and
> >Supercalifragilisticexpialidociousb into the argument list of a
> >procedure, he will have to look at the numbers to differentiate them
> >:-)
> >
> >> (II) s/__dummy/__intent_in/ for clarity?
> >
> >It's moved away a bit from INTENT(IN) now, because an argument which
> >cannot be modified (even by passing to a procedure with a dummy
> >argument
> >with unknown intent) is now also handled.
>
> So maybe __readonly_ , __rdonly_, __rd_or the like? dummy is really misleading a name in the dumps..

Well, dummy is a term with a precise definition in the Fortran
standard, so in a way it's good so one realizes it has something to do
with a dummy argument. But yes, it's a bit misleading because it's not
the dummy argument itself but rather a dereferenced copy of it. I
suggest __readonly_dereferenced_dummy_copy_yes_this_is_a_really_long_name_.
:)


-- 
Janne Blomqvist