From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-229733-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 1927 invoked by alias); 31 Oct 2008 12:54:01 -0000
Received: (qmail 1892 invoked by uid 22791); 31 Oct 2008 12:54:00 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mailfe01.tele2.fr (HELO swip.net) (212.247.154.12)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 12:53:13 +0000
X-Cloudmark-Score:   0.000000 []
X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.0 c=1 a=SIaCdajOecoA:10 a=S_A7w-4k02YA:10 a=IT8fgO77GDvuNP25avdBJA==:17 a=nhrICSdnzaaL1Qf2l8YA:9 a=vRa-kymGFv26t7y3PjWPAccX_CsA:4 a=b8hG5vVbyAkA:10
Received: from [86.72.15.56] (account eu1374348@tele2.fr [86.72.15.56] verified)   by mailfe01.swip.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.6)   with ESMTPA id 83385977; Fri, 31 Oct 2008 13:53:10 +0100
Message-ID: <490AFFB2.2040509@tele2.fr>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 15:13:00 -0000
From: Mikael Morin <mikael.morin@tele2.fr>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20081002)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: correctifs gcc <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,   gfortran <fortran@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR fortran/35840: asynchronous specifier for  a data  transfert statement shall be an initialization expression
References: <48F3704B.3080207@tele2.fr>
In-Reply-To: <48F3704B.3080207@tele2.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2008-10/txt/msg01355.txt.bz2

Hello,

same here:
ping and blablabla commit blablabla.

Mikael


Mikael Morin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> this patch fixes PR35840.
> It takes checking code from gfc_match_init_expr to a separated function
> and uses it to check exotic (non-constant, but reducible) asynchronous
> specifier ("y"//"e"//trim("s  ") which reduces to "yes" was the one
> reported).
> 
> This was first posted on the bugzilla, and pre-approved there.
> It is regression tested.
> 
> Is this Ok ?*
> Mikael.
> 
> PS : My copyright assignment should reach the FSF by the end of this
> week or more probably next week.
> 
> (*) This is my first patch proposal so I'm awaiting comments about
> everything (patch, Changelog, message, syntactic conventions, testcase,
> ...). Be very strict.
> 
> 
> 
>