On 04.07.22 19:20, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> Perhaps you could avoid some code duplication by doing it like:
>                     bool close_paren = gfc_match ("val )") == MATCH_YES;
>                     if (close_paren || gfc_match ("val , ") == MATCH_YES)

Done!

Good idea! I was thinking of things like ...peek_char() but that takes
the next char and not the last one; but your method works.

>> +                  else if (!has_modifiers
>> +                           && gfc_match ("%e )", &step) == MATCH_YES)
>> +                    {
>> +                      if ((step->expr_type == EXPR_FUNCTION
>> +                            || step->expr_type == EXPR_VARIABLE)
>> +                          && strcmp (step->symtree->name, "step") == 0)
>> +                        {
>> +                          gfc_current_locus = old_loc;
>> +                          gfc_match ("step (");
>> +                          has_error = true;
>> +                        }
> I think the above should accept even
> linear (v : step (1) + 0) or linear (v : step (1, 2, 3) * 1)
> which is desirable, because step then will be some other operation (hope
> folding isn't performed yet).
Well, it does. In that case expr_type == EXPR_OP. I added the latter to
the C/C++ and the Fortran testcase.
>> +    !!$omp declare simd linear (x : ref, step (1)) linear (y : step (2), uval)
> Are all these !! intentional?
No – just a missed undo after debugging. It worked/works after changing
it back to '!'.

Revised version attached.

Tobias
-----------------
Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße 201, 80634 München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Frank Thürauf; Sitz der Gesellschaft: München; Registergericht München, HRB 106955