| Message ID | 4D42E6B6.6020304@net-b.de |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, 28 Jan 2011, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Do you have comments to the modification? General comments?
Only two minor nitpicks from my side:
Index: changes.html
===================================================================
+ allocated (if unallocated) or reallocated (if the shape or type
+ parameter is different). To avoid the small performance penalty,
+ you can use for arrays and character strings <code>a(:) = ...</code>
+ instead of <code>a = ...</code> – or disable the feature using
+ <code>-std=f95</code> or <code>-fno-realloc-lhs</code>.</li>
I believe in English we better say "for arrays and ... you can use ...
instead of ... "
+ <li>Namelist variables with allocatable and pointer attribute and
+ nonconstant length type parameter are supported</li>
Full stop?
Gerald
Am 28.01.2011 23:18, schrieb Gerald Pfeifer: > + allocated (if unallocated) or reallocated (if the shape or type > + parameter is different). To avoid the small performance penalty, > + you can use for arrays and character strings<code>a(:) = ...</code> > + instead of<code>a = ...</code> – or disable the feature using > +<code>-std=f95</code> or<code>-fno-realloc-lhs</code>.</li> > > I believe in English we better say "for arrays and ... you can use ... > instead of ... " It is not clear to me whether you suggest: "To avoid the small performance penalty, for arrays ..." or "To avoid the small performance penalty for arrays ..." I think the first one sounds also a bit awkward while the second one changes the meaning. I mean - and read my version such - that using reallocate on assignment has a small performance penalty, but for arrays and character strings one can avoid it. In particular, for noncharacter scalar (allocatable) variables one can not (except by disabling the feature completely). If I revert the order (and remove the comma), it sounds to me as if the performance penalty only affects arrays and character variables. Tobias
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Tobias Burnus wrote: > Am 28.01.2011 23:18, schrieb Gerald Pfeifer: >> + allocated (if unallocated) or reallocated (if the shape or type >> + parameter is different). To avoid the small performance penalty, >> + you can use for arrays and character strings<code>a(:) = ...</code> >> + instead of<code>a = ...</code> – or disable the feature using >> +<code>-std=f95</code> or<code>-fno-realloc-lhs</code>.</li> >> >> I believe in English we better say "for arrays and ... you can use ... >> instead of ... " > It is not clear to me whether you suggest: > "To avoid the small performance penalty, for arrays ..." > or > "To avoid the small performance penalty for arrays ..." > I think the first one sounds also a bit awkward while the second one changes > the meaning. > > I mean - and read my version such - that using reallocate on assignment > has a small performance penalty, but for arrays and character strings > one can avoid it. In particular, for noncharacter scalar (allocatable) > variables one can not (except by disabling the feature completely). Let me try to be more clear. "You can use for arrays" only works in English if there is the concept of a "for array", otherwise this looks like a Germanism. So that would become "To avoid the small performance penalty, for arrays and character strings you can use <code>a(:) =...</code> instead of <code>a = ...</code>. You can also disable..." or "To avoid the small performance penalty, you can use <code>a(:) =...</code> instead of <code>a = ...</code> for arrays and character strings. You can also disable..." Or, of course "You can use <code>a(:) =...</code> instead of <code>a = ...</code> for arrays and characters strings to avoid the small performance penalty. You can also disable..." Hope this clarifies? Gerald
Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > "To avoid the small performance penalty, you can use > <code>a(:) =...</code> instead of<code>a = ...</code> for > arrays and character strings. You can also disable..." I have chosen this version. Tobias
Index: changes.html =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-4.6/changes.html,v retrieving revision 1.97 diff -u -r1.97 changes.html --- changes.html 27 Jan 2011 21:19:49 -0000 1.97 +++ changes.html 28 Jan 2011 15:49:48 -0000 @@ -377,15 +377,17 @@ <li>In pointer assignments it is now possible to specify the lower bounds of the pointer and, for a rank-1 or a simply contiguous data-target, to remap the bounds.</li> - <li>Automatic (re)allocation for arrays: In intrinsic assignments to + <li>Automatic (re)allocation: In intrinsic assignments to allocatable variables the left-hand side will be automatically - allocated (if unallocated) or reallocated (if the shape is different). - To avoid the small performance penalty, you can use, for instance, - for arrays <code>a(:) = ...</code> instead of <code>a = ...</code> - – or disable the feature using <code>-std=f95</code> or - <code>-fno-realloc-lhs</code>. Note: GCC does not yet support - (re)allocation on assignment for allocatable <em>scalar</em> variables. - </li> + allocated (if unallocated) or reallocated (if the shape or type + parameter is different). To avoid the small performance penalty, + you can use for arrays and character strings <code>a(:) = ...</code> + instead of <code>a = ...</code> – or disable the feature using + <code>-std=f95</code> or <code>-fno-realloc-lhs</code>.</li> + <li>Deferred type parameter: For scalar allocatable and pointer + variables the character length can be deferred.</li> + <li>Namelist variables with allocatable and pointer attribute and + nonconstant length type parameter are supported</li> </ul> </li> <li>Fortran 2008 support has been extended: