From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path:
Received: from mail-pl1-x636.google.com (mail-pl1-x636.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::636])
by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA0543858D32;
Sun, 19 Mar 2023 11:42:03 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org BA0543858D32
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com
Received: by mail-pl1-x636.google.com with SMTP id h8so9717419plf.10;
Sun, 19 Mar 2023 04:42:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1679226122;
h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references
:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=3hxSgS7nO5jM1QCUIFVcijCZRLVSVWPQ6Y/9CEiFfC8=;
b=Ii1C71se794w2eg8EJdlvH9hxNlfwvMb9yAenYllxSUqRCc2CEp7ph6cHq5f99jwki
kUUu6CPWrqLQhwcm4X7JP3isUdbVlnOPqu2cW37tRVcIkl9hI00DqSvtQsjb3UvRNtQC
ebvb9TDyH2HiUMvHjoHtTZO0UQBhTXHOS2btYv6j9nAetUZI7HBkWkVe7lA+rThnk9gm
yjbXseIAEeJxy+RnBa5HC9aDvBqnvbmifLpA+PzIgyn4x7re13gjZJ3dpvtWh8C+mpjy
rlleOEN4UxslcvfvHbfiO4Fn9I4K7nRw8mGGf3hlbnXFDeX050l8r5G5ZAVRmQ2BdKsr
Py1w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1679226122;
h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references
:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id
:reply-to;
bh=3hxSgS7nO5jM1QCUIFVcijCZRLVSVWPQ6Y/9CEiFfC8=;
b=bAC3M6uis03xPjfSxLzUKElpTunRlGozSTdwQ2dC+nKVCeDyq8EWjQBqVrwmjqYxpS
diJ/gOpboktdBS4VU16UJyvdcB3eoEGCNXyhwo/xbVjwzP/Hm1AuJQ8SvDcf9x0BUWU0
NjQxt/jRwpNsC9hueX8cXrGrmu7r9abYlM2t9doaNpa7C3dlSAG8LIlLsCX/MBm44Pek
FYeaBh2amegzRru4vVkwHW0DZ17EXo2CAsr3FOZjwFiF1DcHjXdx3Bh1aqpyTSaZVyFG
RHlcSIaKIDVEd2cR37yPr4ggXi0BgrqnY6UcpfZKrVMLWUGs/WPGUeGV/VLUkHoHNHkC
r0jw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWntRrSz55Mmwk45qtfaKi88KAZNcIl0OwNXMzPoRttmEN4icN+
tCES6UJapqOtJwbnd7WU/OGabCq2y6MMk7W27Vc=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+rKG+DQZYOvhu45YdZ5WcOOZefSfZbgb7VMPESn6s9wJpHkelIGJRbRFxlpNHbzcJg8YLBmR5J4kuTAUmmHys=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:2585:b0:19f:28f4:1db with SMTP id
jb5-20020a170903258500b0019f28f401dbmr5165404plb.8.1679226122520; Sun, 19 Mar
2023 04:42:02 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <24a27aff-54ee-442b-c150-9617a1ab4f19@netcologne.de>
In-Reply-To: <24a27aff-54ee-442b-c150-9617a1ab4f19@netcologne.de>
From: Paul Richard Thomas
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2023 11:41:51 +0000
Message-ID:
Subject: Re: [patch, wwwdocs] Mention finalization
To: Thomas Koenig
Cc: gcc-patches , "fortran@gcc.gnu.org"
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000087cc3b05f73f4c18"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,GIT_PATCH_0,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id:
--00000000000087cc3b05f73f4c18
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for that! I think that your one-liner says it all :-)
There are three PRs left open that PR37336 depends on:
PR65347: Is partially fixed. The F2003/8 feature of finalization of a
structure constructor within an array constructor doesn't work. I wonder if
a compile option -finalize-constructors might not be better than
-std=f2003/8?
PR84472: I need to investigate if it is fixed or not. It behaves like one
of the other brands, which complains about a double free. The other brand
does not have this problem. At one stage, I nulled pointer components
before finalization of a function result but removed it because it is not
required by the standard. It might well be a good idea, just on the grounds
that smart-pointers and resource managers seem to be the main real-life use
of finalization and pointer components loom large with them.
PR91316: An impure final call is allowed within a pure procedure at the
moment. Malcolm Cohen convinced me that this should be disallowed.
If the finalization patch has survived a few weeks on mainline without
causing problems, I am inclined to backport to 12-branch. Would that be
acceptable to one and all?
Cheers
Paul
On Sun, 19 Mar 2023 at 08:15, Thomas Koenig via Fortran
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the sentence below seems a bit short for such a huge undertaking,
> but I could not think of anything else to day.
>
> Tested with "tidy -e".
>
> OK for wwwdocs?
>
> Best regards
>
> Thomas
>
>
> diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html
> index c8d757b6..a4b71ffa 100644
> --- a/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html
> +++ b/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html
> @@ -373,7 +373,12 @@ a work-in-progress.
>
>
>
> -
> +Fortran
> +
> + -
> + Finalization is now fully supported.
> +
> +
>
>
>
--
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" -
Albert Einstein
--00000000000087cc3b05f73f4c18--