https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #16 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sat Aug 13 15:04:04 2016
New Revision: 239445
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=239445&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-08-13 Thomas Koenig
Backport from trunk
PR for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #15 from Thomas Koenig ---
This is fixed on trunk and 6-branch (so it will be in the
next release). 5-branch still to do.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #14 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> With one thing and another, I completely forgot about the backport.
> Yes, please do. I am not able to do commits fo the next week.
Upon further investigation revision r233797 caused the pr70040 re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #13 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
Dear Dominique,
With one thing and another, I completely forgot about the backport.
Yes, please do. I am not able to do commits fo the next week.
Thanks
Paul
On 30 July 2016 at 11:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> When I have a moment, I intend to fix 5- and 6-branches.
It would be nice to have it for the next releases. Do you want me to do the
back port?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #11 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com ---
When I have a moment, I intend to fix 5- and 6-branches.
Cheers
Paul
On 22 June 2016 at 16:12, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Any reason why this PR is not closed as FIXED?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Koenig ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Feb 28 22:27:55 2016
New Revision: 233797
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=233797&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-02-28 Thomas Koenig
PR fortran/68147
PR fortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #8 from Thomas Koenig ---
The fix for 47674 wasn't complete.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Koenig ---
Here's a patch:
Index: frontend-passes.c
===
--- frontend-passes.c (Revision 233410)
+++ frontend-passes.c (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -153,7 +153,7
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig ---
This is seriously strange.
Looking into this...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #4 from Martin Reinecke ---
Any progress on this?
I fear that this might affect quite many people once strings of allocatable
length become more popular in Fortran ... and I sure hope they will!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> If I use
>
> print *, len(name), "'", name, "'"
>
> I get
>
> 5 'a.o '
AFAICT the length is always right and the number of characters replaced with a
space is equal to the number of characters
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
If I use
print *, len(name), "'", name, "'"
I get
5 'a.o '
> If I remove the if-statement, the code works as expected.
I see that too.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68147
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
17 matches
Mail list logo
