http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #18 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-07 13:31:07 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Wed Sep 7 13:31:04 2011
New Revision: 178635
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178635
Log:
2011-09-07 Janus Weil
PR fortran/
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #17 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-07 10:56:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> Thus, the patch seems to work.
Ok, thanks for checking. I'll commit as obvious the change to "dg-do link" for
class_45 and class_4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #16 from Tobias Burnus 2011-09-07
07:56:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> +++ class_45b.f03 (working copy)
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -! { dg-do run }
> +! { dg-do link }
With that change, I get:
... gcc-build/gcc> make check-gfo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #15 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-06 12:19:13 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> > Ok, since class_45{a,b} is not really a run-time test, I think the best
> > solution would be to just convert it to "dg-do link":
>
> Good idea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #14 from Tobias Burnus 2011-09-06
06:49:11 UTC ---
Sorry for missing the issue with "run-once"; I thought I had tested it, but
seemingly I haven't done so.
(In reply to comment #13)
> Ok, since class_45{a,b} is not really a run-time
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #13 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-05 19:52:53 UTC ---
Ok, since class_45{a,b} is not really a run-time test, I think the best
solution would be to just convert it to "dg-do link":
Index: class_45b.f03
=
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-05 19:33:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/lib/gfortran-dg.exp
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/lib/gfortran-dg.exp
> @@ -104,7 +104,9 @@ proc gfortran-dg-runtest { testcases defaul
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-05 15:59:45 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > I think one should also do this for class_4{a-d}.f03, where Tobias
> > apparently
> > worked around the problem by a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus 2011-09-05
15:19:17 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> I think one should also do this for class_4{a-d}.f03, where Tobias apparently
> worked around the problem by adding an extra file (just to do the cleanup).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-05 13:52:20 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> A better way is the following patch, which adds "dg-do run-once", which should
> then also be applied to cray_pointers_2.f90.
I think one should al
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus 2011-09-05
12:30:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> That sounds reasonable (much better than the evil "double blank" trick). Ok
> with me.
Can you package it? (This patch, modification to class_45b.f03 w/ com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-05 12:26:14 UTC ---
Sorry for the breakage, guys. Of course I *did* check the test case before
committing, but for some reason the failures did not occur on my machine (I
have no idea why).
(I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus 2011-09-04
21:19:31 UTC ---
I think one problem is that
! { dg-additional-sources class_45a.f03 }
compiles the additional source *after* the main file. That's not trivially
fixable as the library part of $optio
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-04
20:35:36 UTC ---
> An evil trick would be the following, which causes a run once: ...
It works, but I think if this trick is used, it should be documented as in
gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/cray_p
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50288
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres 2011-09-04
19:18:00 UTC ---
I think I understand what's happening, although I don't know how to fix it:
(1) gfortran.dg/class_45a.f03 is compiled and generate g_nodes.mod,
(2) gfortran.dg/class_45b.f03 is
19 matches
Mail list logo
