[RFC]: Patch to support Fortran derived type - Revised
Wu Zhou
woodzltc@cn.ibm.com
Tue Nov 22 09:36:00 GMT 2005
By the way, anyone has any idea or comments about the patch? I am more
than happy to improve it if you have any idea.
According to the new maintenance policy, how long should I ping for my
un-reviewed patch. If it still gets no reply in a specified time, is
there anything I can do to get some attention, escalate this to the SC or
anything else?
P.S: I am asking this because I don't have any knowledge about them ever
since I join in the GDB community. I think other new members might also
feel this way. Someone ever told me to wait for one or two weeks. But
I am not sure.
Regards
- Wu Zhou
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, Wu Zhou wrote:
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> Yes. I am thinking of adding these to gdb manual. But I am not sure how
> to organize them. As you know, we already have three subsection: Fortran
> operators, Fortran defaults and special Fortran command. Which section
> should this kind of text gets into? Maybe special Fortran commands?
> But They are in fact common GDB command, only with somewhat different
> output format. Maybe it make sense to add another new section? What do
> you think?
>
> However I did added a few words in the Fortran operators section. Here is
> the patch:
>
> Index: gdb.texinfo
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo,v
> retrieving revision 1.296
> diff -u -p -r1.296 gdb.texinfo
> --- gdb.texinfo 20 Nov 2005 06:12:59 -0000 1.296
> +++ gdb.texinfo 22 Nov 2005 07:05:01 -0000
> @@ -9159,6 +9159,10 @@ of the second one.
> @item :
> The range operator. Normally used in the form of array(low:high) to
> represent a section of array.
> +
> +@item %
> +Fortran 90 and afterwards use this to access the members of derived
> +type, which is also introduced after the Fortran 90.
> @end table
>
> @node Fortran Defaults
>
>
> Regards
> - Wu Zhou
>
More information about the Gdb-patches
mailing list