| Message ID | CAKwh3qjR-2F4x+EA_K5OfDinHaCrLepLB6+ixB-KzE93jttANw@mail.gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Dear Janus, This is OK for trunk. Thanks fo rthe patch. Cheers Paul On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > here is a patch which fixes the regression in comment #2 of the PR in > the subject line. What it does is setting the 'ts.is_c_interop' flag > correctly for constants with kind-parameter specification (such as > '0.0_c_double'), as is already being done for variables. > > Regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk and 4.6? > > Cheers, > Janus > > > 2011-10-16 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> > > PR fortran/47023 > * primary.c (match_kind_param): Detect ISO_C_BINDING kinds. > (get_kind): Pass on 'is_iso_c' flag. > (match_integer_constant,match_real_constant,match_logical_constant): > Set 'ts.is_c_interop'. > > > 2011-10-16 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> > > PR fortran/47023 > * gfortran.dg/c_kind_tests_3.f03: New. >
Hi Paul, > This is OK for trunk. Thanks fo rthe patch. Thanks. Committed to trunk as r180062. What about 4.6? Cheers, Janus > On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> here is a patch which fixes the regression in comment #2 of the PR in >> the subject line. What it does is setting the 'ts.is_c_interop' flag >> correctly for constants with kind-parameter specification (such as >> '0.0_c_double'), as is already being done for variables. >> >> Regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk and 4.6? >> >> Cheers, >> Janus >> >> >> 2011-10-16 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> >> >> PR fortran/47023 >> * primary.c (match_kind_param): Detect ISO_C_BINDING kinds. >> (get_kind): Pass on 'is_iso_c' flag. >> (match_integer_constant,match_real_constant,match_logical_constant): >> Set 'ts.is_c_interop'. >> >> >> 2011-10-16 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> >> >> PR fortran/47023 >> * gfortran.dg/c_kind_tests_3.f03: New. >> > > > > -- > The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. > --Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy >
Dear Janus, Of course you can commit to 4.6. Be quick, though; 4.6.2 was due for release now-ish - "GCC 4.6 branch remains open under normal release branch rules, accepting regression and documentation fixes. GCC 4.6.2 is tentatively planned for late September or early October." Thanks Paul On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > Hi Paul, > >> This is OK for trunk. Thanks fo rthe patch. > > Thanks. Committed to trunk as r180062. What about 4.6? > > Cheers, > Janus > > > >> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> here is a patch which fixes the regression in comment #2 of the PR in >>> the subject line. What it does is setting the 'ts.is_c_interop' flag >>> correctly for constants with kind-parameter specification (such as >>> '0.0_c_double'), as is already being done for variables. >>> >>> Regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk and 4.6? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Janus >>> >>> >>> 2011-10-16 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> >>> >>> PR fortran/47023 >>> * primary.c (match_kind_param): Detect ISO_C_BINDING kinds. >>> (get_kind): Pass on 'is_iso_c' flag. >>> (match_integer_constant,match_real_constant,match_logical_constant): >>> Set 'ts.is_c_interop'. >>> >>> >>> 2011-10-16 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> >>> >>> PR fortran/47023 >>> * gfortran.dg/c_kind_tests_3.f03: New. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. >> --Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy >> >
> Of course you can commit to 4.6. Ok. Btw, my patch had a small regression (PR50752), which was very quickly reported by Joost. I have just committed the obvious fix as r180079. > Be quick, though; 4.6.2 was due for release now-ish - I know. I'll try to do it today. Cheers, Janus > On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >> Hi Paul, >> >>> This is OK for trunk. Thanks fo rthe patch. >> >> Thanks. Committed to trunk as r180062. What about 4.6? >> >> Cheers, >> Janus >> >> >> >>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> here is a patch which fixes the regression in comment #2 of the PR in >>>> the subject line. What it does is setting the 'ts.is_c_interop' flag >>>> correctly for constants with kind-parameter specification (such as >>>> '0.0_c_double'), as is already being done for variables. >>>> >>>> Regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk and 4.6? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Janus >>>> >>>> >>>> 2011-10-16 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> >>>> >>>> PR fortran/47023 >>>> * primary.c (match_kind_param): Detect ISO_C_BINDING kinds. >>>> (get_kind): Pass on 'is_iso_c' flag. >>>> (match_integer_constant,match_real_constant,match_logical_constant): >>>> Set 'ts.is_c_interop'. >>>> >>>> >>>> 2011-10-16 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> >>>> >>>> PR fortran/47023 >>>> * gfortran.dg/c_kind_tests_3.f03: New. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. >>> --Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy >>> >> > > > > -- > The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. > --Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy >
>> Be quick, though; 4.6.2 was due for release now-ish - > > I know. I'll try to do it today. Alrighty. Just committed the patch to the 4.6 branch as r180099. Seems we're down to three open Fortran front-end regressions for the upcoming 4.6.2 release: * http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42954 (TARGET_*_CPP_BUILDINS issues with gfortran) * http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410 (ICE in record_reference) * http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50684 (Incorrect error for move_alloc on element inside intent(in) pointer) I had started on the third one, but I'm not sure if I can finish it in time for 4.6.2. Anyone up to looking at the second one? Cheers, Janus >> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>> Hi Paul, >>> >>>> This is OK for trunk. Thanks fo rthe patch. >>> >>> Thanks. Committed to trunk as r180062. What about 4.6? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Janus >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> here is a patch which fixes the regression in comment #2 of the PR in >>>>> the subject line. What it does is setting the 'ts.is_c_interop' flag >>>>> correctly for constants with kind-parameter specification (such as >>>>> '0.0_c_double'), as is already being done for variables. >>>>> >>>>> Regtested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk and 4.6? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Janus >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2011-10-16 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> >>>>> >>>>> PR fortran/47023 >>>>> * primary.c (match_kind_param): Detect ISO_C_BINDING kinds. >>>>> (get_kind): Pass on 'is_iso_c' flag. >>>>> (match_integer_constant,match_real_constant,match_logical_constant): >>>>> Set 'ts.is_c_interop'. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2011-10-16 Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org> >>>>> >>>>> PR fortran/47023 >>>>> * gfortran.dg/c_kind_tests_3.f03: New. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. >>>> --Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. >> --Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy >> >
Index: gcc/fortran/primary.c =================================================================== --- gcc/fortran/primary.c (revision 180052) +++ gcc/fortran/primary.c (working copy) @@ -32,16 +32,20 @@ int matching_actual_arglist = 0; /* Matches a kind-parameter expression, which is either a named symbolic constant or a nonnegative integer constant. If - successful, sets the kind value to the correct integer. */ + successful, sets the kind value to the correct integer. + The argument 'is_iso_c' signals whether the kind is an ISO_C_BINDING + symbol like e.g. 'c_int'. */ static match -match_kind_param (int *kind) +match_kind_param (int *kind, int *is_iso_c) { char name[GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN + 1]; gfc_symbol *sym; const char *p; match m; + *is_iso_c = 0; + m = gfc_match_small_literal_int (kind, NULL); if (m != MATCH_NO) return m; @@ -53,6 +57,8 @@ static match if (gfc_find_symbol (name, NULL, 1, &sym)) return MATCH_ERROR; + *is_iso_c = sym->attr.is_iso_c; + if (sym == NULL) return MATCH_NO; @@ -77,20 +83,24 @@ static match /* Get a trailing kind-specification for non-character variables. Returns: - the integer kind value or: - -1 if an error was generated - -2 if no kind was found */ + * the integer kind value or + * -1 if an error was generated, + * -2 if no kind was found. + The argument 'is_iso_c' signals whether the kind is an ISO_C_BINDING + symbol like e.g. 'c_int'. */ static int -get_kind (void) +get_kind (int *is_iso_c) { int kind; match m; + *is_iso_c = 0; + if (gfc_match_char ('_') != MATCH_YES) return -2; - m = match_kind_param (&kind); + m = match_kind_param (&kind, is_iso_c); if (m == MATCH_NO) gfc_error ("Missing kind-parameter at %C"); @@ -188,7 +198,7 @@ match_digits (int signflag, int radix, char *buffe static match match_integer_constant (gfc_expr **result, int signflag) { - int length, kind; + int length, kind, is_iso_c; locus old_loc; char *buffer; gfc_expr *e; @@ -208,7 +218,7 @@ match_integer_constant (gfc_expr **result, int sig match_digits (signflag, 10, buffer); - kind = get_kind (); + kind = get_kind (&is_iso_c); if (kind == -2) kind = gfc_default_integer_kind; if (kind == -1) @@ -221,6 +231,7 @@ match_integer_constant (gfc_expr **result, int sig } e = gfc_convert_integer (buffer, kind, 10, &gfc_current_locus); + e->ts.is_c_interop = is_iso_c; if (gfc_range_check (e) != ARITH_OK) { @@ -473,7 +484,7 @@ backup: static match match_real_constant (gfc_expr **result, int signflag) { - int kind, count, seen_dp, seen_digits; + int kind, count, seen_dp, seen_digits, is_iso_c; locus old_loc, temp_loc; char *p, *buffer, c, exp_char; gfc_expr *e; @@ -611,7 +622,7 @@ done: c = gfc_next_ascii_char (); } - kind = get_kind (); + kind = get_kind (&is_iso_c); if (kind == -1) goto cleanup; @@ -665,6 +676,7 @@ done: e = gfc_convert_real (buffer, kind, &gfc_current_locus); if (negate) mpfr_neg (e->value.real, e->value.real, GFC_RND_MODE); + e->ts.is_c_interop = is_iso_c; switch (gfc_range_check (e)) { @@ -1099,13 +1111,13 @@ static match match_logical_constant (gfc_expr **result) { gfc_expr *e; - int i, kind; + int i, kind, is_iso_c; i = match_logical_constant_string (); if (i == -1) return MATCH_NO; - kind = get_kind (); + kind = get_kind (&is_iso_c); if (kind == -1) return MATCH_ERROR; if (kind == -2) @@ -1118,6 +1130,7 @@ match_logical_constant (gfc_expr **result) } e = gfc_get_logical_expr (kind, &gfc_current_locus, i); + e->ts.is_c_interop = is_iso_c; *result = e; return MATCH_YES;