From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19877 invoked by alias); 1 Mar 2006 19:38:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 19863 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Mar 2006 19:38:33 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from nevyn.them.org (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31.1) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Mar 2006 19:38:31 +0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.54) id 1FEX9Z-0002tc-8o for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Wed, 01 Mar 2006 14:38:29 -0500 Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 19:38:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFC]: Document patch for F90 derived type support Message-ID: <20060301193829.GD6465@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20060228135310.GA25487@nevyn.them.org> <20060301043203.GA17621@nevyn.them.org> <20060301050501.GA18703@nevyn.them.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-03/txt/msg00016.txt.bz2 On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 09:02:34PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 00:05:01 -0500 > > From: Daniel Jacobowitz > > Cc: Wu Zhou , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com > > > > This is the same name that, e.g., gfortran probably uses in some > > error messages. > > If "int4" is the official gfortran name (is it?), then I agree we > should leave it alone. I'm not sure if "official" is really strong enough; I suspect it will use it in some user messages, as well as in debug information. > > No, it can't be quite that simple, because current versions of Fortran > > do support user-named types - "int4" does not necessarily imply > > integer(4). > > Perhaps I'm confused: isn't "int4" a 32-bit integer? I thought it > was, but if I was mistaken, my apologies for the noise. It's not reserved at all in the input to the compiler - it might be something different than a type, or it might be the name of a record type (whatever the correct name for that is). > > Paul also corrected me on the naming - this would be integer(4) > > apparently, integer*4 is something different. > > Can you (or someone else) elaborate, or point me to some document that > does? I believe integer(4) is an integer with kind == 4. Paul wrote: > integer(4) is the standard way, though the "4" has no particular meaning. > integer*4 is a nonstandard (but common) extension saying "I want an > integer 4 somthings wide". This may or may not be the same as integer(4). Make of that whatever you want to... -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery