Re: [Gomp-discuss] fortran parser :-) ..

[Biagio Lucini]

On Tuesday 22 March 2005 15.24, Lars Segerlund wrote:
>  Replying to my self ...
>
>   I have tested a small and stupid 'fix' for gfortrans backtracking, (
> basicly I remember if we already have parsed a comment on this line :-) ...
> this is likely to fail for a lot of cases but for now it will do until the
> real fix ), this gives us some kind of starting point for inserting the
> fortran open mp parser there.
>

Hi Lars - hacking is ok at this stage I guess. I agree with you on that.

>   Now what are we going to do :
>
>       1. adapt out C parser ?
>
>       2. write a new parser ?
>
>       3. I have no idéa ...
>
>   As I said earlier, perhaps we can add some kind of instrumentation to the
> parser we got, even split it into a front and backend ?
>

I would fly low. The first thing I will do is a parser in the literal sense, 
which validate the code and do nothing else. This is what Dmity's parser does 
at this point. I think that the next step will be to mark the parallel code 
in the trees. If we limit what we do before gimplification, we can share much 
of the code between gcc and fortran.

BTW, why don't you send an e-mail to gcc with [gomp] (for my filter :-)) in 
the subject? You are likely to get more educated answer than mine :-)

Cheers
Biagio