From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.95.76.21]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 299F23850855 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2023 15:12:07 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 299F23850855 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=troutmask.apl.washington.edu Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=troutmask.apl.washington.edu Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 328FC5o7078310 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 8 Mar 2023 07:12:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 328FC4oW078309; Wed, 8 Mar 2023 07:12:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2023 07:12:04 -0800 From: Steve Kargl To: Paul Richard Thomas Cc: Thomas Koenig , "fortran@gcc.gnu.org" Subject: Re: [Patch, fortran] PR37336 finalization Message-ID: Reply-To: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu References: <582085ac-0d07-a516-732d-e82e0a4e01c9@netcologne.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,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: On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 07:32:55AM +0000, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: > > Could you please review the patch on that self same time scale? I would be > happy to have feedback one file at a time. > Yes, I'll commit time to review individual patches. Smaller patches are typically easier to review. As to other topics in the thread, I suspect you won't find a lot of open-source Fortran project that make heavy use of finalization. This is likely due to gfortran's current lack of robust support. There, however, must some implicit finalization already occurring. For one of my codes, I see % foreach i (*.o) foreach? nm $i | grep final foreach? end 0000000000000280 T __beamsm_MOD___final_beamsm_Table_t 0000000000000580 T __bsam_MOD___final_bsam_Bsa_info_t 00000000000001e0 T __bsam_MOD___final_bsam_Bsa_t 00000000000000a0 T __ffn_data_MOD___final_ffn_data_Fe_t I do not explicitly use finalization nor do I have subprograms named __final_*. To me, this re-inforces Richard's point about not breaking existing code. -- Steve