| Message ID | ebfe7141-74b7-3633-e631-7f175a6776b4@codethink.co.uk |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Jim, While the test exhibits no particular regression, IMVHO I don't see any reason not to add it. None of my previous testcases include a STRUCTURE within a COMMON block so this would certainly tickle some new code paths, which could expose a future regression. I'll give this through the weekend or so to see if any official maintainers have a comment otherwise I wouldn't mind committing it as trivial. --- Fritz Reese On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Jim MacArthur <jim.macarthur@codethink.co.uk> wrote: > Hi, I'd like to contribute this small test. I have legacy code which uses > STRUCTURE statements in common blocks, and was happy to find Fritz's DEC > support assumes ordering in STRUCTUREs, as the Oracle compiler does. > > Jim MacArthur > > -- > > 2016-09-13 Jim MacArthur <jim.macarthur@codethink.co.uk> > > * gfortran.dg/dec_structure_14.f90: New testcase. >
On 09/13/2016 07:33 AM, Fritz Reese wrote: > Jim, > > While the test exhibits no particular regression, IMVHO I don't see > any reason not to add it. None of my previous testcases include a > STRUCTURE within a COMMON block so this would certainly tickle some > new code paths, which could expose a future regression. > > I'll give this through the weekend or so to see if any official > maintainers have a comment otherwise I wouldn't mind committing it as > trivial. > No problem with the test case being added. Jerry
Committed revision 240134. --- Fritz Reese On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle@charter.net> wrote: > On 09/13/2016 07:33 AM, Fritz Reese wrote: >> >> Jim, >> >> While the test exhibits no particular regression, IMVHO I don't see >> any reason not to add it. None of my previous testcases include a >> STRUCTURE within a COMMON block so this would certainly tickle some >> new code paths, which could expose a future regression. >> >> I'll give this through the weekend or so to see if any official >> maintainers have a comment otherwise I wouldn't mind committing it as >> trivial. >> > > No problem with the test case being added. > > Jerry
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dec_structure_14.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dec_structure_14.f90 new file mode 100644 index 0000000..4e271b73 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/dec_structure_14.f90 @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ + ! { dg-do "compile" } + ! { dg-options "-fdec-structure" } + ! + ! Test that structures inside a common block do not require the + ! SEQUENCE attribute, as derived types do. + ! + +common var + +structure /s/ + integer i + integer j + real r +end structure + +record /s/ var + +end --
Hi, I'd like to contribute this small test. I have legacy code which uses STRUCTURE statements in common blocks, and was happy to find Fritz's DEC support assumes ordering in STRUCTUREs, as the Oracle compiler does. Jim MacArthur -- 2016-09-13 Jim MacArthur <jim.macarthur@codethink.co.uk> * gfortran.dg/dec_structure_14.f90: New testcase.