------- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-20 00:41 ------- Reply to comment #8: that was my take on this, that ifort is correct. It passed my intuitive sense of it. Non-advancing means what it says so that the subsequent write must continue from there and overwrite what was previously written. Then, bytes written already after that are still there and define the end of the record/line.
Regardless, I am close to a fix. I will post to list in the next day or so. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31199
