Dear Jim, FX and Jerry, Frankly, I would accept the patch with the proviso that: (i) It is hidden behand a gfc_notify_std (GFC_STD_GNU, ".......; (ii) The feature is set in conflict with the new features that FX mentions, especially coarrays and bind C; and (iii) As FX says, a good look at the testcases.
It is a rather standalone patch and so should be quite self-maintaining. I suspect that it might even be quite useful to optimise code for devices such as the Intel phi by dint of explicitly preventing memory swopping. If the other maintainers are happy with the above provisos, I suggest Jim that you make the necessary changes and resubmit. If you are not in a position to do this, I could apply myself to it on a timescale of the next few weeks. With best regards Paul On 25 September 2015 at 16:26, FX <fxcoud...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> All in all I’m skeptical of adding even more old language extensions with >>> little demand when we have a hard time filling up gaps in the standard. Each >>> addition adds to maintainance load, especially as they might not interact >>> too well with more modern features. (For example coarrays or BIND attribute, >>> which were not around when AUTOMATIC was in use.) >>> >>> I don’t find any request for this feature in the whole bugzilla database. >> >> That's understandable. We'll maintain this feature in our own delta. I felt >> it >> was in the spirit of open source to offer it in case it was useful. >> >> Thanks for taking the time to review it. > > I definitely appreciate your contribution! And because it is now archived in > the mailing-list archives, if people are interested in the future they can > definitely pick it up. It is a rather “standalone” patch, I don’t think it > would bitrot fast. > > But maybe other developers feel differently about it, in which case we’ll > have a more “technical” review (mostly of the testcases needed, I think). > > Thanks again, > FX -- Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. Groucho Marx
