From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 35222 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2019 15:59:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 34977 invoked by uid 89); 25 Jul 2019 15:59:31 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=HX-Languages-Length:1017, H*f:sk:c106c0d, H*i:sk:c106c0d X-HELO: troutmask.apl.washington.edu Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (HELO troutmask.apl.washington.edu) (128.95.76.21) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 15:59:30 +0000 Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x6PFxSWv042849 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 25 Jul 2019 08:59:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x6PFxR9p042848; Thu, 25 Jul 2019 08:59:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:26:00 -0000 From: Steve Kargl To: Thomas Koenig Cc: "fortran@gcc.gnu.org" , gcc-patches Subject: Re: [patch, fortran] Improve dependency checking Message-ID: <20190725155927.GA42801@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Reply-To: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu References: <20190725142409.GA42079@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.4 (2019-03-13) X-SW-Source: 2019-07/txt/msg01647.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 04:42:44PM +0200, Thomas Koenig wrote: > Hi Steve, > > >> -int gfc_dep_resolver(gfc_ref *, gfc_ref *, gfc_reverse *); > >> +int gfc_dep_resolver(gfc_ref *, gfc_ref *, gfc_reverse *, bool identical = false); > > This is changing the prototype. I would expect to see > > > > > > int gfc_dep_resolver(gfc_ref *, gfc_ref *, gfc_reverse *, bool); > > Usig C++'s optional arguments is actually quite useful, it's used > already used in a few places in the front end. > > The idea is that you don't need to touch the other callers, just the > ones where the new argument matters. > > However, in this particular case, it would also be possible to ajust > all other callers (exactly one), if you prefer. > Ah, I don't speak C++, and didn't know one could corrupt a C prototype in this manner. A quick glance of gfortran.h indeed shows a few more occurences of "bool xxx = false". I suppose the patch is then OK. PS: watch for long lines. -- Steve