--- Comment #9 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-03 19:53 ---
Fixed on trunk.
Closing.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-03 19:50 ---
Subject: Bug 34565
Author: tkoenig
Date: Thu Jan 3 19:49:38 2008
New Revision: 131305
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131305
Log:
2008-01-03 Thomas Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR li
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-28 15:39
---
See in next_array_record where we do not handle negative step size other than
-1
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34565
--- Comment #5 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-28 13:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=14837)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14837&action=view)
partial patch
The attached patch will let the test case from comment #3
succeed, but not the original test case
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-28 01:00
---
The relevant code is in transfer.c (next_array_record). You will see the TODO
in the comment. The array descriptor should be coming in fine to the library
so this function just needs to be updated some.
Enjoy!
--- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-27 15:36 ---
Reduce test case:
$ cat end-2.f90
program main
implicit none
character(len=6) :: c (2) = ""
write (c (2:1:-1), "(I2)") 5
end program main
$ gfortran end-2.f90
$ ./a.out
At line 4 of file end-2.f90
Fortran runt
--- Comment #2 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-27 15:07 ---
With the new transfer_array functions, this
should be fairly easy to do.
I'll take a shot at this.
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--
tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-23 17:03
---
I can confirm this one. Its been a long time since I looked at this. I seem
to recall at one point we had not implemented negative strides for internal
units. Part of the discussion was that it was so obscure w
