https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117455
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I am using:
$ ld --version
GNU ld version 2.41-37.fc40
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117381
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117381
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |enhancement
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117381
--- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #9)
--- snip ---
> So do we want a limit close to
>
> 6.3.2.6 ... A statement shall not have more than one million characters.
>
> ?
This ridiculous number seems to be t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28032
--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 59515
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59515&action=edit
Example illustrating kicker
This simple patch adds a custom procedure to be run on a test case. I am using
in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116025
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116040
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117455
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Info:
-ftrampoline-impl=[stack|heap]
By default, trampolines are generated on stack. However, certain platforms
(such as the Apple M1) do not permit an executable stack. Compiling with
-ftrampoline-imp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117765
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #2)
> In the test case dg-error there is a missing space at the end of the before
> the brace } Fixing and tested here. It fixes one test failure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117765
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle ---
In the test case dg-error there is a missing space at the end of the quote
before the brace } Fixing and tested here. It fixes one test failure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82086
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=117765
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle ---
In the test case dg-error there is a missing space at the end of the before the
brace } Fixing and tested here. It fixes one test failure.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117820
Bug ID: 117820
Summary: Formatted output gives wrong result.
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117819
Bug ID: 117819
Summary: Formatted READ with BZ in format fails
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfortra
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117820
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=117820
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #3)
--- snip ---
> > The error at line 16 is not correct.
>
> Of course it is! But when you add _8 you get what you want.
>
> BTW: why does the integer(4) case not show th
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117765
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117819
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117820
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle ---
>From the standard, the relevent text is: 13.7.2.4 B, O, and Z editing
---
The value of m shall not exceed the value of w, except when w is zero. If m is
zero and the internal value consists of all zero bit
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106507
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 #18 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Bálint Aradi from comment #17)
> Checked with gfortran 14.1, the file created is the same as with the other
> compilers (and which is the standard conforming behavior IMO). Issue can be
> close
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117791
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Oh I see 14.2.1, it is fixed on trunk, gfortran 15.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117791
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117791
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117820
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
The root of the problem here is that the function write_boz uses a type int to
pass in the value n, this value is then tested for zero which fails for a 64
bit integer.
The following hack makes it work but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117765
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117820
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Back to the Standard
>From the standard, the relevent text is: 13.7.2.4 B, O, and Z editing
---
The value of m shall not exceed the value of w, except when w is zero. If m is
zero and the internal value co
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117820
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
With kind=4 we do treat the sign bit as part of the value.
program test
integer(4) :: x
x = -huge(x) - 1_4
print '("-huge -1 = <",B32.32,">")', x
print '("zero = <",B32.32,">")', 0_4
prin
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117819
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
--- Comment #25 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I clearly see where my logic was incorrect. I do wonder if there is a resolve
string expr that would allow us to set the interop for all cases of kind=1
BT_CHARACTER.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
--- Comment #26 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Why not set it in gfc_resolve_expr near the top before any other actions?
also
Are there any systems where c_char is not equal to 1? If not then BT_CHARACTER
and KIND==1 is always C interoperable. ??
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
--- Comment #28 from Jerry DeLisle ---
--- snip ---
> In iso-c-binding.def, one finds
>
> NAMED_CHARKNDCST (ISOCBINDING_CHAR, "c_char",gfc_default_character_kind)
>
> so kind('a') == kind(c_char_'a') on all targets.
This implies that is_c_in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47928
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I was not thinking about rewriting the whole thing, but rearranging enmasse may
be helpful if you know how to do that. I think we need to hear from others
though.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117798
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47928
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117434
--- Comment #18 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #17)
> (In reply to Damian Rouson from comment #16)
> > Is there a chance of this fix being backported to the 14 branch? If not,
> > then I assume this issue can be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117430
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|unassigned
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117434
--- Comment #17 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Damian Rouson from comment #16)
> Is there a chance of this fix being backported to the 14 branch? If not,
> then I assume this issue can be marked as resolved. Unfortunately, however,
> I'm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47485
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117434
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114618
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I am thinking to backport this as it cleans up some output with garbage in it.
Any thoughts?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118774
Bug ID: 118774
Summary: Tab skips miscalculated with 'stream' write
Product: gcc
Version: 15.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libf
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118774
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116829
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118831
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118571
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118724
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I wonder if the fix was the patch for 117434.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118724
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114618
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Oatch submitted:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2025-January/061651.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117819
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117820
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117765
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118032
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Assignee|unassigned at gc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
--- Comment #11 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I get a clean sweep on x86_64_linux_gnu. I will try some jerry-code to see if I
can break it. If anyone else has comments, chime in. I think you submit to
the list Steve.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102689
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102689
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #9)
--- snip ---
>
> The mention of binutils jogged my memory. I had a test failure that showed
> up randomly one time. It was related to class_transformational_2.f9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51820
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118159
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84674
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117730
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88190
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
A
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109105
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109105
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I found the back-port ready to go in my branch. Decided to push it.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71884
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118372
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118372
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Also appears to be OK on 14 as well.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118406
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118571
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to kargls from comment #3)
> diff --git a/libgfortran/io/write.c b/libgfortran/io/write.c
> index 54312bf67e9..084ac314f5c 100644
> --- a/libgfortran/io/write.c
> +++ b/libgfortran/io/write.c
> @@
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118571
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
If no width is specified w_len comes in as zero so we have to handle that case.
diff --git a/libgfortran/io/write.c b/libgfortran/io/write.c
index 54312bf67e9..15a0dd5c3e9 100644
--- a/libgfortran/io/write.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118571
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-01-24
Status|UNCONFIRM
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118571
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 60256
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=60256&action=edit
Proposed final patch
This patch submitted for approval.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116668
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117188
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116668
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58857
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118571
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=106005
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101602
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101602
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I have the patch applied here. do_concurrent_12.f90 has six failures that look
like related to optimization. I will see if I can figure this out.
Running /home/jerry/dev/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dg.e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
--- Comment #16 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Needed a minor tweak:
+ if (string->ts.type != BT_CHARACTER
+ || (string->ts.type == BT_CHARACTER
// && on the inner paren instead of ||
+ && (string->ts.kind != 1 && string->ts.is_c_interop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #59960|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle ---
>From Harald's post. "There is another case I found while playing which is
rejected:
print *, f_c_string(c_char_"abc", asis)"
I bet the parsing does not handle c_char_ with the two underscores. I h
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
--- Comment #19 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to kargls from comment #17)
> On 12/24/24 10:03, jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
> >
> > --- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle ---
> > F
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
--- Comment #12 from Jerry DeLisle ---
The following additional patch from Harald posted on the gfortran list:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2024-December/061452.html
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-intr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117643
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Created attachment 59960
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=59960&action=edit
Cleaned up patch with Harald's addition.
This patch fixes some white space and merges in Haralds patch for op
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118499
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118471
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118499
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #9)
> Question is, what should we permit...
>
> For 'normal' operations, only unsigned op unsigned is permitted,
> so unsigned**unsigned is obviously ok.
>
> What a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117430
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Where we resolve the data transfer statement the variable c_ptr is derived, It
has an attribute of private_comp. The interop_kind is 0. The gdb in resolve.cc
shows:
11745 derived = ts->u.derived;
(g
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118793
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2025-02-16
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118789
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=117430
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle ---
If I had just scrolled down in resolve.cc a few more hunks, eye roll:
$ gfc -pedantic zorig.f90
zorig.f90:45:32:
45 | write(*,*) "B:", self%cptr
|1
Warning:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118884
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Not disagreeing, however:
Warning: Type mismatch at (1) passing global function ‘cslect’ declared at (2)
(UNKNOWN/LOGICAL(4))
cget24.f-pp.f:545:32:
237 |IF( CSLECT( W( I ) ) )
|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=118884
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Thanks Thomas. I was just getting ready to get lapack set up here for future
testing.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119380
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Works for me on gcc version 12.3.1 20230805 (GCC)
The last commit there is commit a3931bf6093dbeda637601da07cdbbd07e57ccbd (HEAD
-> releases/gcc-12)
This was a cherry pick from commit 03fb35f8753d87148b. M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119406
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119403
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119403
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
301 - 400 of 538 matches
Mail list logo
