https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114438
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #5)
> (In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> > The same text existed in F2018, so it is not new: F2018:C7103 and Note 1.
> >
> > Either every compiler developer tea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114438
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> The same text existed in F2018, so it is not new: F2018:C7103 and Note 1.
>
> Either every compiler developer team misunderstood that clause, or we
> need an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114438
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
> The same text existed in F2018, so it is not new: F2018:C7103 and Note 1.
>
> Either every compiler developer team misunderstood that clause, or we
> need an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114438
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #1)
> Can you be a little more explicit?
>
> If I extend the program as follows:
>
> type(params) :: p
> p = params( 0.1, 2.0 )
> write(*,*) p
> p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114438
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114438
Bug ID: 114438
Summary: Missed constraint F2023:c7108
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105547
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114188
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114188
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114141
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P4 |P5
Severity|normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114146
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114141
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
--- Comment #3 from kargl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99837
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
--- Comment #3 from kargl a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99837
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114141
Bug ID: 114141
Summary: ASSOCIATE and complex part ref when associate target
is a function
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77504
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114023
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
--- Comment #1 from kargl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114024
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 57482
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57482&action=edit
patch
The attached patch fixes this PR. It includes a new testcase
and passes regression testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114024
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
--- Comment #2 from kargl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114024
Bug ID: 114024
Summary: ICE allocate statement with source=cmp%re and z an
array
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114023
Bug ID: 114023
Summary: complex part%ref of complex named constant array
cannot be used in an initialization expression.
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114022
Bug ID: 114022
Summary: ICE with a complex part%ref and nested structure
constructor of complex array.
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114021
Bug ID: 114021
Summary: ICE with allocation of scalar pointer entity where
SOURCE=f() with f() returning a pointer
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114020
Bug ID: 114020
Summary: ENTRY and procedure pointer leads to ICE
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114019
Bug ID: 114019
Summary: allocation with source of deferred character length
entity
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113997
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113883
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113883
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 57389
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57389&action=edit
patch to fix bug
This is the patch and testcase. I have successfully bootstrapped
and run the Fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113883
Bug ID: 113883
Summary: allocatable length parameter used but is undefined
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113881
Bug ID: 113881
Summary: Multiple testsuite failures with gfortran on FreeBSD
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113866
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-10
Ever confirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113845
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #2)
> (In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> > Thanks. Reduce test case.
> >
> > subroutine test_adjustl(x)
> > character(*) :: x(100)
> > call bar(adjustl(x))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113845
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> Thanks. Reduce test case.
>
> subroutine test_adjustl(x)
> character(*) :: x(100)
> call bar(adjustl(x))
> end subroutine
Forcing gfc_simplify_adjustl t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113845
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113823
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #2)
> (In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> > (In reply to David Binderman from comment #0)
> > >
> > > This is the second ice from the flang test suite.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113823
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113671
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
--- Comment #15 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #14)
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 09:52:39PM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
> >
> > I think tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57360
--- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Upon some additional thinking, I wonder how useful this will be compared
to the possible volume of warning messages from modern Fortran. Consider
this code:
module foo
integer :: j = 2
type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57360
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #56949|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113412
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 57109
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57109&action=edit
patch
The attached patch has been regtested. There were no regression.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113412
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
With the patch at the end of this message and this source code,
program foo
integer(8) x
real(8) y, z
x = 1
y = x
z = atan(y,x)
print *, z
end
I get
% gfcx -c a.f90
a.f90:6:1
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113412
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Ugh. This seems to be by design.
The error message
Error: Too many arguments in call to ‘atan’ at (1)
is queued by intrinsic.cc(sort_actual) and appears to take
precedence over an error queued
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113413
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113413
Bug ID: 113413
Summary: ATAND(Y,X) is unsupported
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113412
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113412
Bug ID: 113412
Summary: ATAN(Y,X) does not check arguments and generates wrong
error message.
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113313
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
--- Comment #5 from kargl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113313
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113305
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113254
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to mecej4 from comment #2)
> Created attachment 57001 [details]
> Program source that is handled correctly when -fallow-invalid-boz is
> specified
Correctly? It is not the same as the i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113254
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113223
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #3)
> Created attachment 56990 [details]
> Suggested patch including affected test cases
>
> Regression tested OK. Three test cases affected.
>
Thanks, a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113223
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113223
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113223
Bug ID: 113223
Summary: NAMELIST internal write missing leading blank
character
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Prior
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Current patch is incomplete as it fails to scalarize.
It seems I need to remember how to register the new
intrinsic subprograms in trans-intrinsics.cc.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113165
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
With the attached example code and the patch at the end of this
message, gfortran can be changes to identify both lines of code.
Fixing the run-on errors when -fimplicit-none is used is left as
an
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113165
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P5
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
--- Comment #8 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 56956
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56956&action=edit
git diff cannot find trigpi.c (updated file)
The new file tries to deal with a system with REAL(4),
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
--- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 56955
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56955&action=edit
test program for inverse functions
The attach program tests the inverse functions, e.g., acospi, for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
In reflecting on the possibility of an OS lacking support for
REAL(10) but having a REAL(16), the mapping of types into
C are likely REAL(4) <--> float, REAL(8) <--> double, and
REAL(16) <--> long
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 56953
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56953&action=edit
test program
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 56952
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56952&action=edit
file that git cannot find
Put in libgfortran/intrinsics
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 56951
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56951&action=edit
file that git cannot find
Put file in libgfortran/intrinsics
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Created attachment 56950
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56950&action=edit
new file that git cannot diff
Put file in libgfortran/intrinsics.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113152
Bug ID: 113152
Summary: Fortran 2023 half-cycle trigonometric functions
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113128
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-12-24
Known to fail
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I have updated the diff. I don't know have ChangeLog works under git. Here's
what I have written.
* gcc/fortran/gfortran.texi: Remove the "Extended math intrinsics" node.
It documented the onl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #56810|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Possible ChangeLog (although I don't know the git world requirements).
* intrinsic.cc(add_functions): Update the standard that the various
degree trigonometric functions have been described in.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
Bug ID: 112873
Summary: F2023 degree trig functions
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
As
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112364
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112364
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30409
--- Comment #12 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #11)
> (In reply to kargl from comment #10)
> > (In reply to anlauf from comment #8)
>
> > which is equivalent to
> >
> >tmp = 1 / y
> >do i = 1, n
> >
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30409
--- Comment #10 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #8)
> The suggested optimization needs to take into account that the evaluation
> of the temporary expression might trap, or that allocatable variables are
> not al
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30409
--- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The attached testcase use xmin and xmax uninitialized.
After setting xmin = 0 and xmax = 1 and adding z(1) to
the print statements to prevent the inner loop from
being optimized away, I see the f
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111880
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111851
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111853
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111218
--- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
An alternative patch that allows the original code to compile is
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/symbol.cc b/gcc/fortran/symbol.cc
index a6078bc608a..34eb3a65e8f 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/symbol.cc
+++ b/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111218
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
--- Comment #6 from kargl
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111218
--- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Interesting bug. If one puts a break point ...
0x75917d gfc_format_decoder
/home/toon/compilers/gcc/gcc/fortran/error.cc:1078
0x2153e1f pp_format(pretty_printer*, text_info*)
/hom
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107716
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
What the heck does "RESOLVED MOVED"?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111341
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99711
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||12.2.0, 14.0
Priorit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111218
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109684
--- Comment #14 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #13)
> (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #12)
> > On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 10:04:54PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > >
> > > diff --git a/gcc/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109684
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88286
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110825
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110825
Bug ID: 110825
Summary: TYPE(*) dummy argument to generate an unused hidden
argument
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87326
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- C
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110725
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to fail||14.0
Known to work|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110725
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[13/14 Regression] internal |[13/14 Regression,openmp]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110644
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110629
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
1 - 100 of 542 matches
Mail list logo
