https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101047
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109358
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109358
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109453
Bug ID: 109453
Summary: UBOUND incorrect when used in declartion of another
array
Product: gcc
Version: 13.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109453
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|UBOUND incorrect when used |[REGRESSION] UBOUND
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109453
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Correction, this must be a duplicate of something.
With gfortran gcc version 12.2.1 20221121 I get the error.
With gfortran gcc version 12.2.1 20230327 it is fixed.
As far as I can tell it has been fixed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109453
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108131
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109358
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Well this is getting quite interesting. There is a bit of discussion going on
the Fortran Discourse about this.
https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/tab-formatting-with-stream-access/5466/47
After thinki
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109662
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109662
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I knew this looked familiar. We did it on purpose. From list_read.c:
/* A trailing space is required, we give a little latitude here, 10.9.1. */
c = next_char (dtp);
if (!is_separator(c) && c != '!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109662
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Is this acceptable:
$ ./a.out
Compiler version = GCC version 14.0.0 20230424 (experimental)
Compiler options = -mtune=generic -march=x86-64 -Wpedantic
-fpre-include=/usr/include/finclude/math-vector-fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109662
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
A side comment. We have a runtime function called "notify_std". Every time I
try to use it I struggle as it is not intuitively obvious how it works. We
ought to provide some better documentation on using it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109662
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109662
--- Comment #12 from Jerry DeLisle ---
A additional adjustment to reject the semi-colon always.
diff --git a/libgfortran/io/list_read.c b/libgfortran/io/list_read.c
index 78bfd9e8787..db3330060ce 100644
--- a/libgfortran/io/list_read.c
+++ b/li
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109662
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #12)
That recent patch regression tests fine. I should mention, there is one of our
original test cases in gfortran.dg that does use a comma. We definitely have
see
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109662
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109662
--- Comment #19 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 55024
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55024&action=edit
An enhanced test case
This test case from Herald illustrates a variety of combinations.
Giving:
$ gfc -std=
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107068
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107068
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
What is happening here is that in the name list input, the variable flp is also
a legal LOGICAL value, so our read is interpreting it as the second value of
the array flc and trying to continue to read value
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107068
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
In list_read.c we have this comment:
/* To read a logical we have to look ahead in the input stream to make sure
there is not an equal sign indicating a variable name. To do this we use
line_buffer
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109865
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114618
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114611
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114618
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113897
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||urbanjost at comcast dot net
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114304
--- Comment #32 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #28)
> Created attachment 57896 [details]
> Testcase
>
--- snip ---
> I think we need at least an "|| c == '\t'"; I guess '\r' isn't really
> required here, or is i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114304
--- Comment #33 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #30)
> (In reply to rguent...@suse.de from comment #29)
> > Might be for \r\n line endings?
>
> New lines are handled slightly differently – and \f and \v don't seem
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107068
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56744
Bug 56744 depends on bug 107068, which changed state.
Bug 107068 Summary: Run-time error when reading logical arrays with a namelist
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107068
What|Removed |Added
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107031
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114618
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Resolution|DUPLICATE
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114618
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot
gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114618
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|NEW
Depends on|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114618
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 57965
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57965&action=edit
Preliminary patch to fix several issues.
The attached patch is very preliminary and appears to fix the X forma
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105473
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114304
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98426
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98426
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2024-04-24
Status|UNCONFIRME
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98426
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Martin or Matt,
Can you test the following variation to see if you get better results.
return st;
}
retval = NULL;
if (c <= 0)
retval = find_symbol (st->left, name, module, generic);
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114827
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98426
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot
gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98426
--- Comment #11 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I am able to run your reproducer and I can see the increasing times as the
number of modules goes up. I am curious if you could randomize the subroutine
names? These appear fairly repetitive and I wonder if
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98426
--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Matt Thompson from comment #14)
> Never mind. I'll send attachment to Jerry offline. It's too big for here.
Got it. It works quite well for our purposes.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110644
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever c
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93550
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109105
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104626
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97017
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88052
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83829
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83282
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot
gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83282
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66499
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53962
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45129
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111022
--- Comment #22 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Sorry for delays. I am back looking at this.
My take on the table 13.2 for the case: EN0.0E0
No matter what the E for the exponent must be shown.
If the exponent is 0 then a plus sign must be shown.
Th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112643
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105847
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Hi Steve,I will see if I can get all this tested and committed this coming
weekend.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109358
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82943
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103796
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #12)
> Jerry or myself can do the commit later.
>
> Looking at my addition again, I think that this change to invoke.texi:
>
> "... These functions are now GNU extensions
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
--- Comment #16 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #15)
--- snip ---
>
> Jerry, are you starting with the patch submitted by Harald that
> fixes the doc issue. It seems 'gmake pdf', which is what I use
> to check doc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
--- Comment #18 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I have the patch applied.
make pdf and make info work as expected. I fixed a minor typo in a comment for
intrinsic.cc. I have a few of the git magics to do. Shall I submit to the list
before commit?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
--- Comment #22 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #20)
> (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #18)
> > I have the patch applied.
> >
> > make pdf and make info work as expected. I fixed a minor typo in a comment
> > fo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
--- Comment #23 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I am going to suggest the following. The wording was confusing around the
functionality of the option vs the intrinsics. Hope this is OK?
@opindex @code{fdec-math}
@item -fdec-math
Obsolete flag. The purp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot
gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
--- Comment #27 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 56882
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56882&action=edit
Description changes
This is what I arrived at going through. OK?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
--- Comment #29 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 56883
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56883&action=edit
Updated Descriptions
Fixed a few more things, The return value of tand is not in degrees.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
--- Comment #31 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #30)
> (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #29)
> > Created attachment 56883 [details]
> > Updated Descriptions
> >
> > Fixed a few more things, The return value of tan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
--- Comment #32 from Jerry DeLisle ---
commit a1f0d227481fe143f8c15b3f268e2d5964a3c90a (HEAD -> master, origin/master,
origin/HEAD)
Author: Jerry DeLisle
Date: Fri Dec 15 13:05:18 2023 -0800
fortran: Update degree trigs documentation.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112783
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112873
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81615
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113223
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> Jerry can you take a look at this issue.
Will do. Minor tweak I hope.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113223
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 56990
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56990&action=edit
Suggested patch including affected test cases
Regression tested OK. Three test cases affected.
$ git status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113313
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113313
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #7)
--- snip ---
> libgfortran is supposedly thread-safe and looking into
> flush_all_units() shows some unlocking and testing for
> locks. With 'print *, iam('john')',
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113223
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82943
--- Comment #16 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Alexander Westbrooks from comment #15)
> Created attachment 57176 [details]
> Proposed Patch to fix PR82943, PR86148, PR86268
I am attempting to roll with this. Steve, do you know where the cop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111022
--- Comment #24 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Currently gfortran does the following:
character(20) :: fmt
character(9) :: buffer
fmt = "(1a1,d0.2,1a1)"
write(buffer,fmt) ">", 3.0, "<"
print *, buffer
fmt = "(1a1,e0.2,1a1)"
write(buffer,fmt) ">", 3.0,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111022
--- Comment #27 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #26)
> (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #24)
> > Currently gfortran does the following:
> >
> > character(20) :: fmt
> > character(9) :: buffer
> > fmt = "(1a1,d0.2,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104908
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111022
--- Comment #28 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 57260
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=57260&action=edit
A final patch
This patch provides the necessary changes with only minor adjustment to
existing gfortran test
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53962
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109358
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||nmm1 at cam dot ac.uk
--- Comment #8 fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20585
Bug 20585 depends on bug 105361, which changed state.
Bug 105361 Summary: Incorrect end-of-file condition for derived-type I/O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105361
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105361
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105361
--- Comment #11 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Thomas Schwinge from comment #9)
> In some of my test runs (have not yet been able to deduce any pattern), I'm
> seeing this new test case FAIL its execution test:
>
Can you try this minor ch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28032
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 59395
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59395&action=edit
Patch to clean-up dg-do run directives.
This patch cleans up the dg-do run options and adds in a -O option for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28032
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLis
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105361
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20585
Bug 20585 depends on bug 105361, which changed state.
Bug 105361 Summary: Incorrect end-of-file condition for derived-type I/O
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105361
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28032
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jwakely.gcc at gmail dot com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28032
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #11)
> It needs to be on a line on its own, and start with dg-
>
> So:
>
> ! { dg-gfortran-onepass }
>
> And rename the proc to match.
Did this:
! { dg-do run
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117381
--- Comment #21 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #20)
--- snip ---
>
> so you can instead do
>
> gfc_symbol_buffer the_buf;
>
> and have it behave like a char the_buf[GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN] declaration.
>
> The au
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117434
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117455
Bug ID: 117455
Summary: ld warning about executable stack, follows from PR
117434
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Pri
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117434
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to kargls from comment #12)
--- snip ---
> > If you consider that the warning should be treated as significant, then
> > there's an alternate implementation for the trampoline which places the
> >
201 - 300 of 538 matches
Mail list logo
