--- Comment #20 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-01 15:13
---
Closing, thanks for patch.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #19 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-31 15:57 ---
Subject: Bug 35840
Author: mikael
Date: Fri Oct 31 15:56:21 2008
New Revision: 141497
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141497
Log:
2008-10-31 Mikael Morin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR for
--- Comment #18 from mikael dot morin at tele2 dot fr 2008-10-28 14:08
---
The final patch is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2008-10/msg00104.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35840
--- Comment #17 from mikael dot morin at tele2 dot fr 2008-10-12 11:47
---
(In reply to comment #16)
> Mikael, are you still with us? Your approach was fine.
>
Yep, I'm not dead yet.
I was waiting for my copyright assignment form.
Now it's on the way back, I will post to gcc-patches
--- Comment #16 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-10-11 15:32
---
I will see if I can finalize this patch. Mikael, are you still with us? Your
approach was fine.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
---
--- Comment #15 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-10-11 10:35 ---
Ping!
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35840
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-14 21:29
---
Patch committed in Comment #7 only eliminates the ICE. Reduction of the
initialization expression remains.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35840
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-14 19:01
---
Subject: Bug 35840
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Sep 14 19:00:26 2008
New Revision: 140366
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=140366
Log:
2008-09-14 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-14 17:58
---
I see that I did not use RESOLVE_TAG in gfc_resolve_dt. Doing so resolves the
ICE issue. Then if we really want to accept this poorly written code, I think
the place to fix it may be in io.c (resolve_tag)
@@ -2
--- Comment #5 from domob at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-09-14 16:51 ---
Yes, that's probably the best to get comments/reviews for your patch; if you
think it is already mature, CC [EMAIL PROTECTED], too.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35840
--- Comment #4 from mikael dot morin at tele2 dot fr 2008-09-14 16:42
---
Created an attachment (id=16318)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16318&action=view)
proposed patch
The problem here is that the parser matches a general expression and has to
check later that
--- Comment #3 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-17 12:43 ---
I've not had the time to finish this, and now I don't remember the details of
my analysis. Sorry, unassigning myself.
--
tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2008-08-08 21:31 ---
This turned in a rejects valid ?
pr35840.f90:1.25:
write(10,*, asynchronous="Y"//"E"//trim("S "))
1
Error: ASYNCHRONOUS= specifier at (1) must be an initialization expression
--
jv244 at cam
--- Comment #1 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-06 21:03 ---
I'm on it.
--
tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned
14 matches
Mail list logo
