From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pl1-x636.google.com (mail-pl1-x636.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::636]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA0543858D32; Sun, 19 Mar 2023 11:42:03 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org BA0543858D32 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-pl1-x636.google.com with SMTP id h8so9717419plf.10; Sun, 19 Mar 2023 04:42:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1679226122; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=3hxSgS7nO5jM1QCUIFVcijCZRLVSVWPQ6Y/9CEiFfC8=; b=Ii1C71se794w2eg8EJdlvH9hxNlfwvMb9yAenYllxSUqRCc2CEp7ph6cHq5f99jwki kUUu6CPWrqLQhwcm4X7JP3isUdbVlnOPqu2cW37tRVcIkl9hI00DqSvtQsjb3UvRNtQC ebvb9TDyH2HiUMvHjoHtTZO0UQBhTXHOS2btYv6j9nAetUZI7HBkWkVe7lA+rThnk9gm yjbXseIAEeJxy+RnBa5HC9aDvBqnvbmifLpA+PzIgyn4x7re13gjZJ3dpvtWh8C+mpjy rlleOEN4UxslcvfvHbfiO4Fn9I4K7nRw8mGGf3hlbnXFDeX050l8r5G5ZAVRmQ2BdKsr Py1w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1679226122; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=3hxSgS7nO5jM1QCUIFVcijCZRLVSVWPQ6Y/9CEiFfC8=; b=bAC3M6uis03xPjfSxLzUKElpTunRlGozSTdwQ2dC+nKVCeDyq8EWjQBqVrwmjqYxpS diJ/gOpboktdBS4VU16UJyvdcB3eoEGCNXyhwo/xbVjwzP/Hm1AuJQ8SvDcf9x0BUWU0 NjQxt/jRwpNsC9hueX8cXrGrmu7r9abYlM2t9doaNpa7C3dlSAG8LIlLsCX/MBm44Pek FYeaBh2amegzRru4vVkwHW0DZ17EXo2CAsr3FOZjwFiF1DcHjXdx3Bh1aqpyTSaZVyFG RHlcSIaKIDVEd2cR37yPr4ggXi0BgrqnY6UcpfZKrVMLWUGs/WPGUeGV/VLUkHoHNHkC r0jw== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWntRrSz55Mmwk45qtfaKi88KAZNcIl0OwNXMzPoRttmEN4icN+ tCES6UJapqOtJwbnd7WU/OGabCq2y6MMk7W27Vc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+rKG+DQZYOvhu45YdZ5WcOOZefSfZbgb7VMPESn6s9wJpHkelIGJRbRFxlpNHbzcJg8YLBmR5J4kuTAUmmHys= X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:2585:b0:19f:28f4:1db with SMTP id jb5-20020a170903258500b0019f28f401dbmr5165404plb.8.1679226122520; Sun, 19 Mar 2023 04:42:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <24a27aff-54ee-442b-c150-9617a1ab4f19@netcologne.de> In-Reply-To: <24a27aff-54ee-442b-c150-9617a1ab4f19@netcologne.de> From: Paul Richard Thomas Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2023 11:41:51 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch, wwwdocs] Mention finalization To: Thomas Koenig Cc: gcc-patches , "fortran@gcc.gnu.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000087cc3b05f73f4c18" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,GIT_PATCH_0,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: --00000000000087cc3b05f73f4c18 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Thomas, Thanks for that! I think that your one-liner says it all :-) There are three PRs left open that PR37336 depends on: PR65347: Is partially fixed. The F2003/8 feature of finalization of a structure constructor within an array constructor doesn't work. I wonder if a compile option -finalize-constructors might not be better than -std=f2003/8? PR84472: I need to investigate if it is fixed or not. It behaves like one of the other brands, which complains about a double free. The other brand does not have this problem. At one stage, I nulled pointer components before finalization of a function result but removed it because it is not required by the standard. It might well be a good idea, just on the grounds that smart-pointers and resource managers seem to be the main real-life use of finalization and pointer components loom large with them. PR91316: An impure final call is allowed within a pure procedure at the moment. Malcolm Cohen convinced me that this should be disallowed. If the finalization patch has survived a few weeks on mainline without causing problems, I am inclined to backport to 12-branch. Would that be acceptable to one and all? Cheers Paul On Sun, 19 Mar 2023 at 08:15, Thomas Koenig via Fortran wrote: > Hi, > > the sentence below seems a bit short for such a huge undertaking, > but I could not think of anything else to day. > > Tested with "tidy -e". > > OK for wwwdocs? > > Best regards > > Thomas > > > diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html > index c8d757b6..a4b71ffa 100644 > --- a/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html > +++ b/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html > @@ -373,7 +373,12 @@ a work-in-progress.

> > > > - > +

Fortran

> +
    > +
  • > + Finalization is now fully supported. > +
    • > +
> > > -- "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein --00000000000087cc3b05f73f4c18--