From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8659F385B50A for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 22:03:53 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 8659F385B50A Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmx.de Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmx.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1677276223; i=anlauf@gmx.de; bh=840SdHhjunqhfEcv11cuCY5QVj5lkpl4kcocqcH5cME=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=iPtlGhIU9lRTbtjFje9oIzYEW8OlaU8US4QMwK6RzC1PkGkewP942nEEw/hUrkatv 8PifMfPjyCq9Ul+PXSHrlGmEQi0tBADwj40sCCFbH7+FQMbhgPbEg5vnIAchpB6wPN Ua/bO0b1YydxryzattDQQ3UpWDqiZ1deHWK7wEJGuJorfBvPP3gYMBDuLBEBj6NWNo Bi2WKXojbLhGEXTEEyb3eWJFnXtbacVFeX/MBjP3m6MXsQ7f8jZ1xLhDb5gZs5w4uK CY3IvHGYJ81x2OIZNLqnty0vKh7anwGNmc5Ei77XnyaU3K9g/MZ7SvueYsLE1BCdOv D0FGp8SDFWtjA== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from [192.168.178.29] ([93.207.80.111]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MHXBp-1pI9cs0wLp-00DYME; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 23:03:43 +0100 Message-ID: <48dcf6fc-9a16-84b1-1963-afdbacfbb57e@gmx.de> Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2023 23:03:42 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.7.1 Subject: Re: Support for WEAK attribute, part 2 To: Rimvydas Jasinskas Cc: Rimvydas Jasinskas via Fortran , gcc-patches@gnu.org Newsgroups: gmane.comp.gcc.patches,gmane.comp.gcc.fortran References: <0115618b-059b-fd11-a813-33374f16af78@gmx.de> <87h6vo8u8u.fsf@euler.schwinge.homeip.net> <1d59f51b-fffc-3a3a-4c92-edfe5c525783@gmx.de> Content-Language: en-US From: Harald Anlauf In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:LKMCjeA27/Xr/KZbiIb9+FxB9+wzJb94aBOymZwFKHJF2j8cKoM FbvAShxIHRMLDeE+PCtPnYjjlxCm0wbbAuHI5myBUh5SnMKhf8xxtz0GyHBd0FDF1rMCn7B SSI1JYfButl8Ik/aXJLKKHnBMF47YPMknwNHk1c9Gar28uRfQEbJ6AzKI7PHIghS7iU3XZN sdutavuU/Ub4gAaWuAy7g== UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:Z1vW5rPyWdQ=;NEZuX1sx2FHAk8Pr9wvmQVREjvU uPXL5NQPnLHH6cb0Z19yq/NO3LGZ6DiGjrbaN4QVdvFqKxDLs5On2B8ohPTwDGgYFF2Jo79a2 bSbQL91TRSYmou84PWGeei1QgS6piRrAtXPrl8SWqbdyIzYd/7xMvGz1cmyqwMiwo7/WvafWL l/09VimPEbPBnQZO+PK0r2A0lXynuPgHu8dwnp5WFCYDf9qZIuslzDMNigUdIfzhAlJWISabc eEewYQ7tkEDwRIe1a5EN2h5gXDYDit3L6593Xs83dBIWk/A4y0EQrVLEtTEoqIc+ZUrVZmzlA U4cLBCdVbXZi+JxUTy1L3MrPkjEUWg5FyXxR8P6Sgl5x0oPPNmtJJcjDimVOd3ljkEzt8Tycz TwytQkbu+sudg9XkmD9N3VBEMd2k+82X3UXcNB6imxYkyL0GCt3qxXLaok9MM1OzB6ZG1oln6 Hq1Bmld8FL4Rp3NjU1U7/bcGFT+nviZqvlx1l9Ofvi41isOpi1MSIB7JAkhLkMlASm6Ol5jdK OJ/RpStaSjj+NOBacx/isQPivUjR/Tz7LrWguv6LU0Gkgt45XSEoUH7gi3QkgrDjAfOCdjKgZ gtPbkIN83jhr/e7lDC3v6NfEQgKLiaaxGfEHtTcHToaPCtAuY8zTCsJMFTkHcIL+MnHSQVll5 bsBKjIcs32RctrhPGyJ1Ji4AWU0k9Es4I5y1k6XoRI+PD1WawLNrzR3VeqsJlQhG/NV9F0AUx f+tMqsdLZ4LWMLGeTmAhPcU4oBoT8UJfvctRYtYJ1WAKdcVALSulaMOPWA+xM6qr7VbHxUrT8 cxdmDYIU5f2heA/K6dU6PxMwALWfSqfc0I7JCnI6+fd1ZHfIRv45QvVX2b3043e7qV3VVLysM l4HhfbBGp1Pi2oQvXxeDDzfwCjW6/o+XR/mqGo/aOYJfjC+A7n5/gLbnD15EOBLhO8PUpI+bs v5g59g== X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,KAM_SHORT,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Hi Rimvydas, Am 24.02.23 um 06:16 schrieb Rimvydas Jasinskas via Gcc-patches: > On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 10:53 PM Harald Anlauf wrote: >> the patch is mostly fine, but there is a minor style issue: >> >> + if (sym->attr.ext_attr & (1 << EXT_ATTR_WEAK)) >> + gfc_error ("Symbol %qs at %L has the WEAK attribute but is a %s", >> + sym->name, &sym->declared_at, sym->attr.dummy >> + ? "dummy argument" : "local variable"); >> + >> >> It is my understanding that this is not translation-friendly. >> Please use separate error texts for either case instead. > Interesting, I was under the impression this was fixed with OO-inlines > around the *.c rename. if this is the case, I must have missed it. > In any case, adjusted in v2 to use: > + if (sym->attr.ext_attr & (1 << EXT_ATTR_WEAK)) > + { > + if (sym->attr.dummy) > + gfc_error ("Symbol %qs at %L has the WEAK attribute but is a " > + "dummy argument", sym->name, &sym->declared_at); > + else > + gfc_error ("Symbol %qs at %L has the WEAK attribute but is a " > + "local variable", sym->name, &sym->declared_at); > + } This is ok. > These testcases are dg-compile and do not go through the "-O0 -O1 -O2 > -O3 -Os" options like dg-run. Combining the testcases does not reduce > gfortran.sum a lot: I wasn't thinking of gfortran.sum, it's about the total overhead of the testsuite (dejagnu etc.). But thanks for combining the tests! >> Finally, please do not forget to CC patches to gcc-patches@ >> so that others can see them. > Out of curiosity, what is the purpose of CC patches to gcc-patches > too? Attachments are even available in web mailing list too, like in: > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2023-February/058953.html Well, patches should always go the gcc-patches@, see e.g. https://gcc.gnu.org/gitwrite.html On the other hand, many *Fortran* reviewers will ignore patches there and look at them only when they are sent to fortran@. Thanks for your patch, pushed as r13-6338-gbcbeebc498126c . Harald > Regards, > Rimvydas