From: Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>
To: Richard Bunt <richard.bunt@arm.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, nd@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Logical short circuiting with Fortran argument lists
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2018 18:34:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ed3a280b7b6781cdfb8e863c5997934f@polymtl.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9972887c-0dab-aef3-db1f-0e2323085dc7@arm.com>
On 2018-08-06 12:35, Richard Bunt wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Many thanks for the review.
>
> To clarify, do you observe the test passing with no changes to eval.c
> or
> just when the additions are applied?
I mean that I saw the test passing only with the first hunk applied (the
one that adds code).
> If the former is the case, may I ask which compiler are you using? I
> have retested with 953473375500 and I see 13 tests fail without the
> additions. If it's the latter, the deletions are not strictly needed
> but
> my analysis determined that this code was unreachable after this patch.
>
> My analysis consisted of checking for regressions in the test suite (of
> which there were none) and examining all uses of noside from the new
> early termination to eval_call in TYPE_CODE_FUNC. There are no
> assignments and it's passed to all functions by value.
Ah indeed, I read it wrong the first time. I thought that the second
hunk was in a totally different case of the main switch (handling of a
different OP_*. But now I see that this is all under the
"OP_F77_UNDETERMINED_ARGLIST" case, and that we'll never reach the
bottom part with "noside == EVAL_SKIP".
It LGTM then.
Simon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-06 18:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-03 9:32 Richard Bunt
2018-08-03 19:24 ` Simon Marchi
2018-08-06 16:35 ` Richard Bunt
2018-08-06 18:34 ` Simon Marchi [this message]
2018-08-06 19:07 ` Tom Tromey
2018-08-07 16:26 ` Richard Bunt
2018-08-07 17:40 ` Tom Tromey
2018-08-08 16:59 ` Richard Bunt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ed3a280b7b6781cdfb8e863c5997934f@polymtl.ca \
--to=simon.marchi@polymtl.ca \
--cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
--cc=nd@arm.com \
--cc=richard.bunt@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox