From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18020 invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2019 07:46:37 -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 17928 invoked by uid 89); 12 Nov 2019 07:46:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=officially, H*f:sk:7e3e8ce, H*i:sk:7e3e8ce X-HELO: mail-yb1-f181.google.com Received: from mail-yb1-f181.google.com (HELO mail-yb1-f181.google.com) (209.85.219.181) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:46:35 +0000 Received: by mail-yb1-f181.google.com with SMTP id k206so3431619ybb.5; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 23:46:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=DJaqDBA17ugWMB8CRutViu4lEIWwAyP0B0QAgP2txdY=; b=ZAx1qiJZpR6o7O+GkbksZ4e6sKJ5xPOQ6ew0xSgRJLDDn6Ce+dwXQaVXSu1x/NbMlH 6WALQbHbJRU3fg6qbA8D7RCKKXUz5y3XKUQcLjJbnBVPag+ajbQfCx1W+nd184fphoat 9KIPHV85D0BS/a5linEhpRV1uW2lGwr3/Gr9BAShCTg0Nd0UmOr6/2drJHPu+9XW9dlC KDqEql+YtFNVEp3BjO1qr+JAwamWajR+12zewuSjPh1StI2UwVnQwLBtrybcB9ChPi2m VLOPqbqETpw5BoSXRyMJRyaIZso5ft0zQHruTRGIyfYTLXPmYcsFEgC2GHpjd3wbgxPw cY+w== MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <48286910-ebbb-10e4-488b-8c96e505375c@tkoenig.net> <7e3e8ce4-e7ed-c583-80dd-51bf7f9b2d15@tkoenig.net> In-Reply-To: <7e3e8ce4-e7ed-c583-80dd-51bf7f9b2d15@tkoenig.net> From: Janne Blomqvist Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:48:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch, fortran] Load scalar intent-in variables at the beginning of procedures To: =?UTF-8?Q?Thomas_K=C3=B6nig?= Cc: "fortran@gcc.gnu.org" , gcc-patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SW-Source: 2019-11/txt/msg00823.txt.bz2 On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 12:53 AM Thomas K=C3=B6nig wrote: > > Hi Janne, > > > Wouldn't it be even better to pass scalar intent(in) variables by > > value? The obvious objection of course is ABI, but for procedures with > > an explicit interface we're not following any particular ABI anyways? > > The problem with that is that we don't know when we compile a procedure > if it will be called with an explicit interface or not. > > The user can always add an interface block for a stand-alone procedure. Ah, of course. I should have said module procedures. Or even module procedures without bind(C)? That being said, I've seen examples where people have figured out the symbol mangling and are calling module procedures directly from C, so will breaking such code (even if not officially supported) be an issue? --=20 Janne Blomqvist