On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 18:24:58 -0800, Steve Kargl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bad news. The problem is still present in HEAD, ie., source from > 3 hours ago. Even worse news is cutting down the BLAS test > program can be a chore. I'll see what I can do. > > To be clear, gfortran works fine with -D '2005-02-12 22:30' sources, > which excludes the above commit. The -D '2005-02-12 22:45' sources > include the above commit and gfortran has a serious regression. You > reverted the entire commit, then re-applied what portion of the > commit? ChangeLog does not reflect any of these manipulations > with any kind of accurate date. Yes, I just added a [reverted temporarily] note to the ChangeLog entry. I reapplied the portion marked c++/16405, which doesn't have the [reverted] note on it. I suspect that the problem is that the transformations fold_indirect_ref_1 is doing on arrays don't mix well with how fortran handles arrays. Could someone familiar with the fortran frontend take a look at that function? Jason
