I've opened PRs for both of these issues:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110547
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110548
-Andrew
--
* Andrew Benson: http://users.obs.carnegiescience.edu/abenson
* Galacticus: https://github.com/galacticusorg/galacticus
On Wed, Jun 28
I've been starting to try using OpenMP task parallelism, but I'm running into
some issues. I'm not sufficiently experienced with task parallelism in OpenMP
to know if I'm misunderstanding how it should work, or if there's a compiler
bug.
Here's an example code (highly simplified from the actua
I opened a PR on bugzilla for the following:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109066
The following code (compiled using current trunk), when run, causes a
segfault, and valgrind complains about an invalid read. The code appears
correct to me, and runs correctly (no segfault, no warn
I agree with Steve that the lack of finalization support in gfortran means
there are not many open-source Fortran projects that rely on it.
I've made extensive use of finalization:
https://github.com/galacticusorg/galacticus
An issue with this is that I had to work-around the missing pieces of
Hi Salvatore,
I've run into similar error messages occasionally. I've never been able to
fully track down the cause, but it seems to happen if I change the content of
a derived type (e.g. add some new variable to it), recompile the module
containing it, but don't recompile some other module tha
I've been following the fix proposed by Bernhard in this thread:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-April/055907.html
to allow static linking of Fortran codes compiled with -fopenmp. (I know that
static linking of OpenMP codes isn't guaranteed to work, but this fix has
worked well for m
Hi Salvatore,
This looks like it's related to some of the missing finalization functionality
(https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336). Paul has some patches
(e.g. https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2022-January/057415.html) which
implement most of the missing functionality. With
leading brand and I thought that the leading brand was
> wrong.
>
> Give me a day or two and prod me if I do not come up with the goods by the
> end of the week.
>
> Paul
>
>
> On Wed, 15 Sept 2021 at 01:31, Andrew Benson via Fortran <
>
> fortran@gcc.gnu.org
I do not come up with the goods by the
> end of the week.
>
> Paul
>
>
> On Wed, 15 Sept 2021 at 01:31, Andrew Benson via Fortran <
>
> fortran@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> > I will (hopefully) have some time in the next few months to work on
> > gfortr
I will (hopefully) have some time in the next few months to work on gfortran.
I could pick up a few easy PRs to fix, but a more ambitious (and more useful)
task would be to work on some of the missing finalizations. For my own work
finalization of function results and stay constructors would be
10 matches
Mail list logo
