Dear Andre,
Well, time passed and it didn't get done. Too much going on at the moment!
As you say, the patch bootstraps and regtests on x86_64, FC21 in my case.
I am now very reluctant to mess around with the gcc-5 release. Thus, I
think that this patch must be committed to 5.2 and 6.0, when the are
open for business.
A few trivial comments:
+ /* The dummy is returned for pointer, allocatable or assumed rank arrays.
+ The check for pointerness needs to be repeated here (it is done in
+ IS_CLASS_ARRAY (), too), because for class arrays that are pointers, as
+ is the one of the sym, which is incorrect here. */
What does this mean, please?
+ /* Returning the descriptor for dummy class arrays is hazardous, because
+ some caller is expecting an expression to apply the component refs to.
+ Therefore the descriptor is only created and stored in
+ sym->backend_decl's GFC_DECL_SAVED_DESCRIPTOR. The caller is then
+ responsible to extract it from there, when the descriptor is
+ desired. */
+ if (IS_CLASS_ARRAY (sym)
+ && (!DECL_LANG_SPECIFIC (sym->backend_decl)
+ || !GFC_DECL_SAVED_DESCRIPTOR (sym->backend_decl)))
+ {
+ decl = gfc_build_dummy_array_decl (sym, sym->backend_decl);
+ /* Prevent the dummy from being detected as unused if it is copied. */
+ if (sym->backend_decl != NULL && decl != sym->backend_decl)
+ DECL_ARTIFICIAL (sym->backend_decl) = 1;
+ sym->backend_decl = decl;
+ }
The comments, such as the above are often going well beyond column 72,
into the 80's. I know that much of the existing code violates this
style requirement but there is no need to do so if clarity is not
reduced thereby.
In trans-stmt.c s/standart/standard/
Don't forget to put the PR numbers in the ChangeLogs.
For this submission, I would have appreciated some a description of
what each chunk in the patch is doing, just because there is so much
of it. I suppose that it was good for my imortal soul to sort it out
for myself but it took a little while :-)
Cheers and many thanks for the patch.
Paul
On 27 March 2015 at 13:48, Paul Richard Thomas
<paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Andre,
>
> I am in the UK as of last night. Before leaving, I bootstrapped and
> regtested your patch and all was well. I must drive to Cambridge this
> afternoon to see my mother and will try to get to it either this
> evening or tomorrow morning. There is so much of it and it touches
> many places; so I must give it a very careful looking over before
> giving the green light. Bear with me please.
>
> Great work though!
>
> Paul
>
> On 24 March 2015 at 18:06, Andre Vehreschild <ve...@gmx.de> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have worked on the comments Mikael gave me. I am now checking for
>> class_pointer in the way he pointed out.
>>
>> Furthermore did I *join the two parts* of the patch into this one, because
>> keeping both in sync was no benefit but only tedious and did not prove to be
>> reviewed faster.
>>
>> Paul, Dominique: I have addressed the LOC issue that came up lately. Or
>> rather
>> the patch addressed it already. I feel like this is not tested very well, not
>> the loc() call nor the sizeof() call as given in the 57305 second's download.
>> Unfortunately, is that download not runable. I would love to see a test
>> similar
>> to that download, but couldn't come up with one, that satisfied me. Given
>> that
>> the patch's review will last some days, I still have enough time to come up
>> with something beautiful which I will add then.
>>
>> Bootstraps and regtests ok on x86_64-linux-gnu/F20.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andre
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 11:13:27 +0100
>> Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Andre,
>>>
>>> Dominique pointed out to me that the 'loc' patch causes a ICE in the
>>> testsuite. It seems that 'loc' should provide the address of the class
>>> container in some places and the address of the data in others. I will
>>> put my thinking cap on tonight :-)
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> On 23 March 2015 at 13:43, Andre Vehreschild <ve...@gmx.de> wrote:
>>> > Hi Mikael,
>>> >
>>> > thanks for looking at the patch. Please note, that Paul has sent an
>>> > addendum to the patches for 60322, which I deliberately have attached.
>>> >
>>> >> 26/02/2015 18:17, Andre Vehreschild a écrit :
>>> >> > This first patch is only preparatory and does not change any of the
>>> >> > semantics of gfortran at all.
>>> >> Sure?
>>> >
>>> > With the counterexample you found below, this of course is a wrong
>>> > statement.
>>> >
>>> >> > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/expr.c b/gcc/fortran/expr.c
>>> >> > index ab6f7a5..d28cf77 100644
>>> >> > --- a/gcc/fortran/expr.c
>>> >> > +++ b/gcc/fortran/expr.c
>>> >> > @@ -4059,10 +4060,10 @@ gfc_lval_expr_from_sym (gfc_symbol *sym)
>>> >> > lval->symtree = gfc_find_symtree (sym->ns->sym_root, sym->name);
>>> >> >
>>> >> > /* It will always be a full array. */
>>> >> > - lval->rank = sym->as ? sym->as->rank : 0;
>>> >> > + as = sym->as;
>>> >> > + lval->rank = as ? as->rank : 0;
>>> >> > if (lval->rank)
>>> >> > - gfc_add_full_array_ref (lval, sym->ts.type == BT_CLASS ?
>>> >> > - CLASS_DATA (sym)->as : sym->as);
>>> >> > + gfc_add_full_array_ref (lval, as);
>>> >>
>>> >> This is a change of semantics. Or do you know that sym->ts.type !=
>>> >> BT_CLASS?
>>> >
>>> > You are completely right. I have made a mistake here. I have to tell the
>>> > truth, I never ran a regtest with only part 1 of the patches applied. The
>>> > second part of the patch will correct this, by setting the variable as
>>> > depending on whether type == BT_CLASS or not. Sorry for the mistake.
>>> >
>>> >> > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
>>> >> > index 3664824..e571a17 100644
>>> >> > --- a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
>>> >> > +++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
>>> >> > @@ -1013,16 +1017,24 @@ gfc_build_dummy_array_decl (gfc_symbol * sym,
>>> >> > tree dummy) tree decl;
>>> >> > tree type;
>>> >> > gfc_array_spec *as;
>>> >> > + symbol_attribute *array_attr;
>>> >> > char *name;
>>> >> > gfc_packed packed;
>>> >> > int n;
>>> >> > bool known_size;
>>> >> >
>>> >> > - if (sym->attr.pointer || sym->attr.allocatable
>>> >> > - || (sym->as && sym->as->type == AS_ASSUMED_RANK))
>>> >> > + /* Use the array as and attr. */
>>> >> > + as = sym->as;
>>> >> > + array_attr = &sym->attr;
>>> >> > +
>>> >> > + /* The pointer attribute is always set on a _data component,
>>> >> > therefore
>>> >> > check
>>> >> > + the sym's attribute only. */
>>> >> > + if (sym->attr.pointer || array_attr->allocatable
>>> >> > + || (as && as->type == AS_ASSUMED_RANK))
>>> >> > return dummy;
>>> >> >
>>> >> Any reason to sometimes use array_attr, sometimes not, like here?
>>> >> By the way, the comment is misleading: for classes, there is the
>>> >> class_pointer attribute (and it is a pain, I know).
>>> >
>>> > Yes, and a good one. Array_attr is sometimes sym->attr and sometimes
>>> > CLASS_DATA(sym)->attr aka sym->ts.u.derived->components->attr. In the
>>> > later
>>> > case .pointer is always set to 1 in the _data component's attr. I.e., the
>>> > above if, would always yield true for a class_array, which is not
>>> > intended,
>>> > but rather destructive. I know about the class_pointer attribute, but I
>>> > figured, that it is not relevant here. Any idea how to formulate the
>>> > comment better, to reflect what I just explained?
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Andre
>>> > --
>>> > Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> > From: Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com>
>>> > To: Andre Vehreschild <ve...@gmx.de>, Dominique Dhumieres
>>> > <domi...@lps.ens.fr> Cc:
>>> > Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 21:20:20 +0100
>>> > Subject: Bug in intrinsic LOC for scalar class objects
>>> > Dear Andre and Dominique,
>>> >
>>> > I have found that LOC is returning the address of the class container
>>> > rather than the _data component for class scalars. See the source
>>> > below, which you will recognise! A fix is attached.
>>> >
>>> > Note that the scalar allocate fails with MOLD= and so I substituted
>>> > SOURCE=.
>>> >
>>> > Cheers
>>> >
>>> > Paul
>>> >
>>> > class(*), allocatable :: a(:), e ! Change 'e' to an array and
>>> > second memcpy works correctly
>>> > ! Problem is with loc(e), which
>>> > returns the address of the
>>> > ! class container.
>>> > allocate (e, source = 99.0)
>>> > allocate (a(2), source = [1.0, 2.0])
>>> > call add_element_poly (a,e)
>>> > select type (a)
>>> > type is (real)
>>> > print *, a
>>> > end select
>>> >
>>> > contains
>>> >
>>> > subroutine add_element_poly(a,e)
>>> > use iso_c_binding
>>> > class(*),allocatable,intent(inout),target :: a(:)
>>> > class(*),intent(in),target :: e
>>> > class(*),allocatable,target :: tmp(:)
>>> > type(c_ptr) :: dummy
>>> >
>>> > interface
>>> > function memcpy(dest,src,n) bind(C,name="memcpy") result(res)
>>> > import
>>> > type(c_ptr) :: res
>>> > integer(c_intptr_t),value :: dest
>>> > integer(c_intptr_t),value :: src
>>> > integer(c_size_t),value :: n
>>> > end function
>>> > end interface
>>> >
>>> > if (.not.allocated(a)) then
>>> > allocate(a(1), source=e)
>>> > else
>>> > allocate(tmp(size(a)),source=a)
>>> > deallocate(a)
>>> > allocate(a(size(tmp)+1),source=e) ! mold gives a segfault
>>> > dummy = memcpy(loc(a(1)),loc(tmp),sizeof(tmp))
>>> > dummy = memcpy(loc(a(size(tmp)+1)),loc(e),sizeof(e))
>>> > end if
>>> > end subroutine
>>> > end
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de
>
>
>
> --
> Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's
> too dark to read.
>
> Groucho Marx
--
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's
too dark to read.
Groucho Marx
