From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23461 invoked by alias); 6 Feb 2006 20:57:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 23425 invoked by alias); 6 Feb 2006 20:57:23 -0000 Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 20:57:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060206205723.23424.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug rtl-optimization/24406] EQUIVALENCE broken in 32-bit code with optimization -O2 In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-02/txt/msg00562.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #9 from sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu 2006-02-06 20:57 ------- Subject: Re: EQUIVALENCE broken in 32-bit code with optimization -O2 On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 08:33:39PM -0000, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote: > > ------- Comment #7 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-02-06 20:33 ------- > Note that http://www.netlib.org/blas/d1mach.f has code > The version of blas that is bundled with lapack from netlib does not include this routine. A grep on lapack sources shows no nonconforming uses of equivalence. I certainly won't object to someone hacking gfortran to do what the programmer wants, but I think the effort could be spent on other parts of gfortran that actually broken with respect to the standard. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24406