https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=120131
--- Comment #8 from Vladimir Terzi <vterzi1996 at gmail dot com> --- I initially changed the status, because I assumed that my questions in comment #2 will be ignored. (In reply to kargls from comment #6) > I suppose it is somewhat naive of gfortran contributors to expect that users > read the documentation supplied with the compiler. Not in the case of what is assumed to be common knowledge. Most of Stack Overflow users claimed that the correct integer*4 range in Fortran is [-2147483648:2147483647]. This statement can even be found in Fortran language references of Oracle and IBM. (In reply to kargls from comment #6) > ‘-fno-range-check’ > Disable range checking on results of simplification of constant > expressions during compilation. For example, GNU Fortran gives an > error at compile time when simplifying ‘a = 1. / 0’. With this > option, no error is given and ‘a’ is assigned the value > ‘+Infinity’. If an expression evaluates to a value outside of the > relevant range of [‘-HUGE()’:‘HUGE()’], then the expression is > replaced by ‘-Inf’ or ‘+Inf’ as appropriate. Similarly, ‘DATA > i/Z'FFFFFFFF'/’ results in an integer overflow on most systems, but > with ‘-fno-range-check’ the value "wraps around" and ‘i’ is > initialized to -1 instead. > > Those last two sentences are important. I fail to see, how this two sentences explain that z'80000000' is an invalid integer of kind 4 due to the Fortran standard. (In reply to kargls from comment #6) > % gfortran14 -o z -fno-range-check -pedantic a.f90 && ./z > a.f90:1:21: > > 1 | print *, -2147483648 > | 1 > Warning: Integer outside symmetric range implied by Standard Fortran at (1) > -2147483648 > > So, yes, more than one gfortran contributor has thought about the corner > case of -huge(1) - 1. This is the message I would have wished to see as the error message in this case.
