Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
I think that a comment is in order every time that you exploit the
upper/lower case distinction.
OK for trunk.
Thanks for the review and thanks for the comment.
I have now added some comments to symbol.c's gfc_undo_symbols, decl.c's
gfc_match_decl_type_spec and gfc
Dear Tobias,
Sorry that I took an extra day over this approval; I kept getting disturbed.
[Remark: The delected section in resolve_symbol with gfc_find_symbol(..&ds)
was originally added in r133488 for PR fortran/33295]
Hah! I plead guilty. I think that it must have been a necessary
workaround
Dear Tobias,
I'll take a look this afternoon.
Cheers
Paul
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> I would like to *ping*.
>
> Additionally, I attached an updated patch as the tree-walking patch is now
> in. The updated patch is also available at
> https://userpage.physik.fu-be
Dear Tobias,
Please stop sending us the patch! I received it right from the first
mailing
Cheers
Paul
On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Last try: Also gzip the release notes - let's see whether it mailserver
> accepts that email.
>
> Tobias
>
>> PS: I really hate that
Last try: Also gzip the release notes - let's see whether it mailserver
accepts that email.
Tobias
PS: I really hate that the email get's simply dropped without any
reject email or any other status. Seemingly, my other emails without
patches go through!
I just realized that my patch email di
Am 06.11.2011 17:26, schrieb Tobias Burnus:
I just realized that my patch email did not come through - however, I
did not get any reject email. Let's try first without patch - it's
available at
http://users.physik.fu-berlin.de/~tburnus/tmp/constructor.diff
I wondered whether the patch exceede
Last try: Also gzip the release notes - let's see whether it mailserver
accepts that email.
Tobias
PS: I really hate that the email get's simply dropped without any
reject email or any other status. Seemingly, my other emails without
patches go through!
I just realized that my patch email d
Am 06.11.2011 17:26, schrieb Tobias Burnus:
I just realized that my patch email did not come through - however, I
did not get any reject email.
Let's try first without patch - it's available at
http://users.physik.fu-berlin.de/~tburnus/tmp/constructor.diff
Possibly it is too large - it's bel
Also the following failed. Thus, the patch links again:
- http://users.physik.fu-berlin.de/~tburnus/tmp/constructor.diff
- Release notes:
http://users.physik.fu-berlin.de/~tburnus/tmp/releasenotes.diff
Tobias
PS: I really hate that the email get's simply dropped without any reject
email or an
I just realized that my patch email did not come through - however, I
did not get any reject email.
Let's try first without patch - it's available at
http://users.physik.fu-berlin.de/~tburnus/tmp/constructor.diff
Tobias
Rouson, Damian wrote:
Bravo! Thanks for all the hard work, Tobias.
Alt
Bravo! Thanks for all the hard work, Tobias.
Although I realize many people will (correctly) label the constructor
capability as syntactic sugar, it supports an idiom that is common across
OOP languages as you point out. Common idioms have expressive power.
Damian
On 11/6/11 6:29 AM, "Tobias B
11 matches
Mail list logo
