From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1334 invoked by alias); 27 Aug 2004 13:52:24 -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 1326 invoked from network); 27 Aug 2004 13:52:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 27 Aug 2004 13:52:24 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7RDqDS2013812 for ; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:52:23 -0400 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (porkchop.devel.redhat.com [172.16.58.2]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i7RDqD304192; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:52:13 -0400 Received: from gnu.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3987B2B9D; Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:51:04 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <412F3C47.9060904@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:52:00 -0000 From: Andrew Cagney User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; NetBSD macppc; en-GB; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040801 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Lecomber , Jim Blandy Cc: patches Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFA] PR gdb/648 (eval.c approval reqd) References: <1091830216.4188.23.camel@localhost> <1092659964.5816.5.camel@localhost> <1093009988.5529.40.camel@cpc4-oxfd5-5-0-cust12.oxfd.cable.ntl.com> <1093599149.26156.19.camel@cpc4-oxfd5-5-0-cust12.oxfd.cable.ntl.com> In-Reply-To: <1093599149.26156.19.camel@cpc4-oxfd5-5-0-cust12.oxfd.cable.ntl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-08/txt/msg00731.txt.bz2 >>> It seems to me that there's a separate bug in f-valprint.c. The >>> output below is incorrect, right? It's printed as a series of >>> columns, not a series of rows. Or is that what users of a Fortran >>> debugger would expect? >>> >>> (gdb) p twodi >>> $1 = (( 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, >>> 19, 20) ( 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, >>> 34, 36, 38, 40) ( 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 33, 36, 39, 42, >>> [..] > > > A Fortran user would expect this like this, so it's not a bug. Suppose > a Fortran-er is working with an array of 3-d points, for some finite > element application. To ensure the x,y,z are in adjacent memory for > better cache behaviour, there'd be an array of REAL(3, 100000) -- which > when printed by GDB will produce a list of points (x, y, z). They'd want > that. Where were we at with the testcase? I've a fuzzy memory of it hitting a problem with test infrastructure? Andrew