From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7474 invoked by alias); 30 Apr 2002 13:40:48 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 7460 invoked from network); 30 Apr 2002 13:40:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO tetsuo.nj.caldera.com) (63.124.204.226) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 30 Apr 2002 13:40:46 -0000 Received: from caldera.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by tetsuo.nj.caldera.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g3UDpS904059; Tue, 30 Apr 2002 09:51:28 -0400 Message-ID: <3CCEA15F.A299E742@caldera.com> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 06:40:00 -0000 From: Petr Sorfa Organization: Caldera X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Snyder CC: "gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com" Subject: Re: [RFC] FORTRAN95 Expression parser References: <3CCD99D3.66CD0B7E@caldera.com> <3CCDF533.4D5C2851@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2002-04/txt/msg01154.txt.bz2 Hi Michael, > > I've created a FORTRAN95 expression parser for GDB. It is based off the > > current FORTRAN expression parser, but has changed significantly in > > source and functionality. I've developed it as a new separate parser > > with the file prefix of f95-x as opposed to the existing f-x files. > > > > The question is whether I should submit the patch as the f95-x files > > (which will leave the current FORTRAN parser untouched) or replace the > > existing FORTRAN parser? > > > > Note that the F95 parser fully supports F77/F90/F95, but differs a bit > > from the existing fortran gdb parser (which relies a bit heavily on C > > notation.) > > How much does it differ? Functionally? In user-visible ways? > How about test suites? It differs considerably - it supports FORTRAN expressions, not C expressions that handle FORTRAN stuff. It supports FORTRAN intrinsics (KIND, SIZE, LEN, ALLOCATED, ASSOCIATED, etc..). Proper FORTRAN array subscripts (including stride). Proper print out of FORTRAN types and variables. Supports column major notation. Supports MODULES, CONTAINS, TYPE records, and so on. User visible ways are considerably different, like I said, it treats expressions like FORTRAN would. I've added around 500 new test cases. Petr