https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43072
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Tue Jan 15 22:18:55 2019
New Revision: 267953
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=267953&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-01-15 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/43072
* resolve
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-19 04:28 ---
Fixed. Thanks, Joost!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-09 20:19 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Same as 41113 - I'll decide what to do tonight - see you on #gfortran?
PR41113 is closed as fixed - can this be closed as well?
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
W
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-22 05:44 ---
Subject: Bug 43072
Author: pault
Date: Mon Feb 22 05:43:57 2010
New Revision: 156949
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156949
Log:
2010-02-22 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/43072
* dep
--- Comment #6 from paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
2010-02-21 10:43 ---
Subject: Re: unneeded temporary (s=s+f(a))
Same as 41113 - I'll decide what to do tonight - see you on #gfortran?
Paul
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 10:48 PM, burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
wrote:
>
>
>
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-20 21:48 ---
Can this PR be closed? I think it is fixed now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43072
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-20 12:47 ---
Subject: Bug 43072
Author: pault
Date: Sat Feb 20 12:46:43 2010
New Revision: 156926
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156926
Log:
2010-02-20 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/36932
PR fo
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-16 15:46 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
I have just patched a tree with the fix for PR36932 on an i686 at work. None
of these temporaries appear!
Something is different between 32 and 64 bits..
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bug
--- Comment #2 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2010-02-15 07:58 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Yes, indeed.
>
> In fact, S2((/(real (i),i=1,2)/)) produces calls to pack and unpack in both S0
> and S1.
>
> I'll take a look at it.
You did beat me again, I wanted to file the following te
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-15 07:51 ---
Yes, indeed.
In fact, S2((/(real (i),i=1,2)/)) produces calls to pack and unpack in both S0
and S1.
I'll take a look at it.
Thanks
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
10 matches
Mail list logo