of P and F in a format.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: fkrogh#gcc at mathalacarte dot com
GCC build
ed at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: fkrogh#gcc at mathalacarte dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30998
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56637
Bug #: 56637
Summary: Bad result on max(1,shiftr(j,1))
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56637
--- Comment #1 from Fred Krogh 2013-03-16
18:02:49 UTC ---
I realize this is not much help for a bug report. I can't get a small test
case to fail, and if I change the optimization level it works. Also, I can't
be sure whether the proble
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56637
--- Comment #3 from Fred Krogh 2013-03-16
18:46:06 UTC ---
First some confusion. If I single step over the first statement it works
properly. Once past that confusion, deleting both -floop-block and
-floop-strip-mine from the make file it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56637
--- Comment #5 from Fred Krogh 2013-03-16
21:25:46 UTC ---
I don't mean to be argumentative, but I would like to ask:
Would an index out of bounds explain why single stepping over the statement
make it work, and would it explain that a hig
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56637
--- Comment #7 from Fred Krogh 2013-03-16
21:44:46 UTC ---
As mentioned in my first post, I am compiling with -fcheck-bounds. The errors
are occurring in a subroutine inside what at the moment is a main program.
That subroutine has no ar
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56637
--- Comment #9 from Fred Krogh 2013-03-17
04:42:39 UTC ---
I have tried, but the small examples I've tried all work. And the code uses a
library that I am not free to pass on. Probably you just have to call this
unconfirmed and forget it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56637
--- Comment #12 from Fred Krogh 2013-03-17
15:35:10 UTC ---
For those using valgrind on gentoo for the first time (like me) you need to add
to FEATURES in make.conf, "splitdebug" and re-emerge glibc.
I've tried running valgrind on my pro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56637
--- Comment #13 from Fred Krogh 2013-03-17
16:40:22 UTC ---
As perhaps you have already guessed, this is just me being confused. After
removing a lot of stuff from the code, I inserted a print statement thus
620 k = max(1, shiftr(l
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56887
Bug #: 56887
Summary: Test for equality of reals now flagged with a warning
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: nor
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: fkrogh#gcc at mathalacarte dot com
GCC build triplet: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.1
GCC host triplet: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.
--- Comment #2 from fkrogh#gcc at mathalacarte dot com 2009-08-24 17:34
---
I had thought that was the case as well. But when I started getting some
negative times by subtracting the previous value from the current one in the
first location of the array I looked at the info file and
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: fkrogh#gcc at mathalacarte dot com
Dr. Richard Hanson has written code to provide IEEE exception handling to
gfortran. He is the sole owner of that code and it could be used by gcc as
they wish. The code is on my server at http
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58020
--- Comment #2 from Fred Krogh ---
1. Hanson is willing to assign the copyright if you expect to be using this
work. There were thoughts to include this work on a SIAM website where we
think SIAM would want the copyright, but if gfortran wants to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58020
--- Comment #9 from Fred Krogh ---
Concering Fortran language standards, our guru is W. Van Snyder a long time
member of the Fortran Standards committee. He has said to me in an email:
"It's OK not to support stuff, but the inquiry functions have
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50619
Bug #: 50619
Summary: Surprising interaction between -finit-real=NAN and
the associate construct
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNC
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50892
Bug #: 50892
Summary: Internal compiler error: in gimplify_expr, at
gimplify.c:7477
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53867
Bug #: 53867
Summary: Probably a bogus warning on types
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51104
Bug #: 51104
Summary: internal compiler error: in gfc_get_derived_type
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: fkrogh#gcc at mathalacarte dot com
Created attachment 32701
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32701&action=edit
This code illustrates the problem above
The a
ignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: fkrogh#gcc at mathalacarte dot com
If I have a statement like
real(kind(1.0d0)), parameter :: big=1.0d0/0.0d0
the compile fails with an error even when using the option -ffpe-trap=
The man page for gcc makes this excellent point
-Wno-d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61002
--- Comment #2 from Fred Krogh ---
Thanks, that did the job.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60993
--- Comment #2 from Fred Krogh ---
Thanks for the suggestion. As a result of another suggestion, I'm using
-fno-range-check and defining infinity as 1.0d0/0.0d0.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61002
--- Comment #4 from Fred Krogh ---
No objection here. I had just missed -fno-range-check, see comment 1.
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: fkrogh#gcc at mathalacarte dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60462
--- Comment #1 from Fred Krogh ---
With this command line
./tapt -u ./mps afiro
it gives
/home/m/math77/lin/cons/anypoint/tapt ./tapt -u ./mps afiro
The standard makes no mention of providing the first part of what is here.
That first part is
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60462
Fred Krogh changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: fkrogh#gcc at mathalacarte dot com
Created attachment 34733
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34733&action=edit
Short program that gives the internal compiler error
Compile the attach
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: fkrogh#gcc at mathalacarte dot com
Compile the attached with
gfortran -Dplet_=\'d\' -g -o test test.F90
or replace the d with s, q, or nonsense. The kind of preprocessor code used
here seems to be ha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65026
--- Comment #1 from Fred Krogh ---
The first test.F90 I attached had some extra '=' signs in the #defines. I have
tried to replace that test.F90 with a corrected version which gets the same
error. I'm not clear if this replacement was successfu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65025
--- Comment #2 from Fred Krogh ---
Created attachment 34734
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34734&action=edit
The small test program that shows the error.
Maybe this time the code will get there?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65025
--- Comment #4 from Fred Krogh ---
In collapsing a big code to the small example, I left out a line that should be
there. Add below the first line
use ISO_C_BINDING, only: C_DOUBLE, C_FLOAT, C_LONG_DOUBLE
This has no effect however on the in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65025
--- Comment #5 from Fred Krogh ---
I realize (now) that this is not a valid Fortran code. I was trying to hard to
make it work like it works in C. Removing the apostrophes around the s, d, and
q, in both the code and on the command line, and al
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: fkrogh#gcc at mathalacarte dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 37073
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=37073&action=edit
Compile this as indicated in the comments and get a segmentation fault in the
c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49636
Summary: Associate construct confused with slightly complicated
case
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Compone
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49636
--- Comment #1 from Fred Krogh 2011-07-04
23:21:21 UTC ---
Sorry failed to include the output of the program. Here it is.
i_good= 1 3 5
i_bad= 1 4197184 3
compatible with gdb
Product: gcc
Version: 4.1.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: fkrogh#gcc at mathalacarte dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29872
38 matches
Mail list logo
