On 3/9/23 10:08 AM, Harald Anlauf via Fortran wrote:
Dear all,
the attached almost obvious patch fixes a NULL pointer dereference
in a check of a symbol with the bind(c) attribute.
Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for mainline?
This PR is marked as 10/11/12/13 regression, thus it should
q
While recovering from an illness here folks I have been following all of
these discussions. I think I will put in my two cents worth.
From what i can see, Paul's patch breaks nothing and fixes many things.
The only thing holding us back is fear we might break something. The
likelihood of act
Dear all,
the attached almost obvious patch fixes a NULL pointer dereference
in a check of a symbol with the bind(c) attribute.
Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for mainline?
This PR is marked as 10/11/12/13 regression, thus it should
qualify for a backport. It's simple enough anyway.
Tha
Hi Paul,
-fdefault-integer-8 does indeed fix the problem with
rnflow.f90 but breaks tfft2.f90, with a type mismatch at lines 36 and 44.
integer(8), parameter :: jmul = 843314861 ! multiplicateur
integer(8), parameter :: jadd = 453816693 ! constante additive
Does the job
On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 08:18:08AM +, Richard Biener wrote:
>
> the existing comment already explains the issue. I suppose
> -fdefault-integer-8 would also work around the issue?
>
Please, no. -fdefault-* options should have been removed
from gfortran years ago. Without a careful review, o
Hi Richard,
Good spot! -fdefault-integer-8 does indeed fix the problem with rnflow.f90
but breaks tfft2.f90, with a type mismatch at lines 36 and 44.
integer(8), parameter :: jmul = 843314861 ! multiplicateur
integer(8), parameter :: jadd = 453816693 ! constante additive
Does
On Thu, 9 Mar 2023, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> On 08.03.23 22:35, I wrote:
> > On 08.03.23 15:55, Paul Richard Thomas via Fortran wrote:
> >> As noted below, rnflow.f90 hangs with the unpatched mainline at -O3 but
> >> runs successfully at -O2.
> >
> > I can confirm that.
> >
> >> I presume that thi
On Wed, 8 Mar 2023, Thomas Koenig wrote:
> On 08.03.23 15:55, Paul Richard Thomas via Fortran wrote:
> > As noted below, rnflow.f90 hangs with the unpatched mainline at -O3 but
> > runs successfully at -O2.
>
> I can confirm that.
>
> > I presume that this is a serious regression since it involv
Right, 3270 was the terminal. Wonderful beasts :).
Anyway, this reminded me of an experiment I did a couple of years ago with
wrapping the BerkeleyDB library in Fortran. I never had much use for it,
but it works for small enough value of "work".
But this is diverting a lot from the purpose of thi
