public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug fortran/35913] New: INTRINISIC vs. host-associated procedures (check conformance)
@ 2008-04-12 10:24 burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-17 20:51 ` [Bug fortran/35913] " pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-17 23:07 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-04-12 10:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
This is in a way a follow up to PR 35476. This PR is a reminder that we should
check whether gfortran behaves correctly or not; the thread became twisted
enough and contains too many similar but different test cases that I could not
quickly see this.
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/8bc064b25f12ed91
--
Summary: INTRINISIC vs. host-associated procedures (check
conformance)
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35913
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/35913] INTRINISIC vs. host-associated procedures (check conformance) 2008-04-12 10:24 [Bug fortran/35913] New: INTRINISIC vs. host-associated procedures (check conformance) burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-17 20:51 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 23:07 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-17 20:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs ------- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 20:51 ------- I believe that gfortran behaves correctly in all the testcases in this thread. I have written to Bob Corbet to see if he agrees. The nub of the matter is that a local declaration always has precedence over a host associated one. My inclination is to close the PR unless Bob disagrees. Cheers Paul -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35913 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/35913] INTRINISIC vs. host-associated procedures (check conformance) 2008-04-12 10:24 [Bug fortran/35913] New: INTRINISIC vs. host-associated procedures (check conformance) burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 20:51 ` [Bug fortran/35913] " pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-17 23:07 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2009-12-17 23:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs ------- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 23:07 ------- I think that at the current result of gfortran is OK. However, I think a proper way would to send an interpretation request as we did before (PR39997, PR 40264). The question seems to be whether it is valid at all and, if so, which interpretation is correct. I think we have at least two or three examples which should be part in an interpretation request. (I have filled PR 42418 for some issues found when testing the code in James last post, which is a bit unrelated to this PR.) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35913 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <bug-35913-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>]
* [Bug fortran/35913] INTRINISIC vs. host-associated procedures (check conformance) [not found] <bug-35913-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> @ 2011-03-13 14:34 ` pault at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-12-17 16:10 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: pault at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2011-03-13 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35913 Paul Thomas <pault at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pault at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas <pault at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-03-13 14:34:07 UTC --- Tobias, Nearly two years unconfirmed.... time to close this one as a WONTFIX? Cheers Paul ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/35913] INTRINISIC vs. host-associated procedures (check conformance) [not found] <bug-35913-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2011-03-13 14:34 ` pault at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-12-17 16:10 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2013-12-17 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35913 Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> --- > Nearly two years unconfirmed.... time to close this one as a WONTFIX? More than two years and a half later without feedback closing. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-12-17 16:10 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-04-12 10:24 [Bug fortran/35913] New: INTRINISIC vs. host-associated procedures (check conformance) burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-17 20:51 ` [Bug fortran/35913] " pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2009-12-17 23:07 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
[not found] <bug-35913-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2011-03-13 14:34 ` pault at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-12-17 16:10 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).