Ciao Steve,
Il 12/04/2013 1.59, Steve Kargl ha scritto:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 01:17:07AM +0200, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
Steve Kargl wrote
My
disagreemnet is predicated on the stupidity of using a 10 line
example subroutine without actually inspecting what it does on
whatever OS that one choo
Greetings, Steve Kargl!
>> >> * gfortran's example for random_see should be change to not use
>> >> system_clock for the random seed.
>> >
>> >I disagree. The example is just that a short example
>> >that demonstrates how to use random_seed. Anyone using
>> >that example in his/her code without
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 01:17:07AM +0200, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
> Steve Kargl wrote
>
> > My
> > disagreemnet is predicated on the stupidity of using a 10 line
> > example subroutine without actually inspecting what it does on
> > whatever OS that one chooses to use.
>
> It is just because one h
Steve Kargl wrote
My
disagreemnet is predicated on the stupidity of using a 10 line
example subroutine without actually inspecting what it does on
whatever OS that one chooses to use.
It is just because one has tested that code that these problems came to
light... :-)
Ciao,
Angelo.
--
Pr
On 11/04/2013 7:00 PM, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:23:42PM +0100, N.M. Maclaren wrote:
On Apr 11 2013, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:35:54PM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
* gfortran's example for random_see should be change to not use
system_clock for the random
Steve Kargl wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:35:54PM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
* gfortran's example for random_see should be change to not use
system_clock for the random seed.
I disagree. The example is just that a short example
that demonstrates how to use random_seed. Anyone using
t
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:23:42PM +0100, N.M. Maclaren wrote:
> On Apr 11 2013, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:35:54PM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> >>
> >> * gfortran's example for random_see should be change to not use
> >> system_clock for the random seed.
> >
> >I disagree.
On Apr 11 2013, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:35:54PM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
* gfortran's example for random_see should be change to not use
system_clock for the random seed.
I disagree. The example is just that a short example
that demonstrates how to use random_seed.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:35:54PM +0200, Tobias Burnus wrote:
>
> * gfortran's example for random_see should be change to not use
> system_clock for the random seed.
>
I disagree. The example is just that a short example
that demonstrates how to use random_seed. Anyone using
that example in
On 4/11/2013 4:48 PM, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
Mum wrote:
This is obviously not
how the monotonic system clock is supposed to work, so that's a bug
in Cygwin.
I fixed that in CVS.
> Mum
Oh, thanks mum... I hope it will be fixed also in the next 1.7.18.. :)
Yeah, that's pretty much the way
Tobias Burnus:
b) Newlib is broken. For clock_gettime, CLOCK_MONOTONIC is not
implemented. But both CLOCK_MONOTONIC and even _POSIX_MONOTONIC_CLOCK
(with value 200112L) are defined. However, POSIX states: "If the
Monotonic Clock option is supported, all implementations shall support
a clock_id
Mum wrote:
This is obviously not
how the monotonic system clock is supposed to work, so that's a bug
in Cygwin.
I fixed that in CVS.
> Mum
Oh, thanks mum... I hope it will be fixed also in the next 1.7.18.. :)
Ciao,
Angelo.
PS. Corinna, your "Hi kiddies" has been irresistible...
--
Pro
On Apr 11 22:35, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Apr 11 21:13, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> >>Where is actually the source code of the clock_gettime, which Cygwin
> >>uses? I thought that it was newlib. But looking at
> >>http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/newlib/libc/sys/l
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Apr 11 21:13, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Where is actually the source code of the clock_gettime, which Cygwin
uses? I thought that it was newlib. But looking at
http://sourceware.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/src/newlib/libc/sys/linux/clock_gettime.c?cvsroot=src
the code should ret
On Apr 11 21:13, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Works fine for me with the current Cygwin 1.7.17, and the upcoming
> >Cygwin 1.7.18:
> > if (!clock_gettime (CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &tp))
> > printf ("tv_sec = %ld, tv_nsec = %ld\n", tp.tv_sec, tp.tv_nsec);
> ...
> > tv_sec =
On Apr 11 21:09, Angelo Graziosi wrote:
> Hi mum [1],
:)
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> >Works fine for me with the current Cygwin 1.7.17, and the upcoming
> >Cygwin 1.7.18:
> >
> > $ cat > ct.c <
> At each run, your test case almost always starts with the same value:
>
> $ gcc -o ct ct.c
> [.
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Works fine for me with the current Cygwin 1.7.17, and the upcoming
Cygwin 1.7.18:
if (!clock_gettime (CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &tp))
printf ("tv_sec = %ld, tv_nsec = %ld\n", tp.tv_sec, tp.tv_nsec);
...
tv_sec = 0, tv_nsec = 29920
Where is actually the source cod
Hi mum [1],
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Works fine for me with the current Cygwin 1.7.17, and the upcoming
Cygwin 1.7.18:
$ cat > ct.c <
At each run, your test case almost always starts with the same value:
$ gcc -o ct ct.c
$ ./ct
tv_sec = 0, tv_nsec = 2793
tv_sec = 0, tv_nsec = 89104
tv_
On Apr 11 15:37, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Please CC your reply to fort...@gcc.gnu.org
Please don't CC me or cgf. We're subscribed to the Cygwin list anyway.
> Dear all,
>
> using clock_gettime with CLOCK_MONOTONIC fails on Cygwin; it always
> gives 0. That breaks code compiled with GCC's gfortran
Please CC your reply to fort...@gcc.gnu.org
Dear all,
using clock_gettime with CLOCK_MONOTONIC fails on Cygwin; it always
gives 0. That breaks code compiled with GCC's gfortran which uses
system_clock in libgfortran.
libgfortran uses CLOCK_MONOTONIC if defined and otherwise it falls back
to
20 matches
Mail list logo
