--- Comment #13 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-28 01:48
---
Not a regression, closing.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-28 01:53
---
Closing as not a bug. If anyone sees something in the standard otherwise,
please let me know.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #36 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-28 01:59
---
Closing, will not backport to 4.2 unless someone feels strongly about it.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-28 02:28
---
I think this can be closed. No need to backport. RE-open if anyone disagrees.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-28 02:39
---
I will try this one.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-28 04:21
---
Valgrind gives no error related to uninitialized when compiling with gfortran.
I am not sure this is a problem of real concern.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-31 01:45
---
Michael sent me this excellent test case illustrating the problem.
PROGRAM test
CHARACTER(LEN=8) :: as_written, as_read
as_written = "12345678"
OPEN (76, FILE="test.txt&q
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-31 01:46
---
I just need to hit the right button in bugzilla.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-31 06:06
---
Here is a preliminary patch for this.
Index: io/transfer.c
===
*** io/transfer.c (revision 123355)
--- io/transfer.c (working copy
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-31 17:28
---
Thomas, thanks for c.l.f query. From the response so far:
>>
>
> 9.5.3.4.1 "On output to a file connected for unformatted direct access,
>the output list shall not specify more
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-31 18:59
---
The patch does not appear to fix this on 4.3
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31409
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-01 04:25
---
Created an attachment (id=13313)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13313&action=view)
Test case
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31409
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-01 04:45
---
I believe gfortran 4.3 is correctly handling this test case. There should be
two error messages from trying to read the larger B(4) array from a record that
contains a smaller A(2) array, thus reading past end
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-01 16:24
---
Subject: Bug 31366
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Apr 1 16:23:48 2007
New Revision: 123401
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123401
Log:
2007-04-01 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-01 16:24
---
Subject: Bug 31207
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Apr 1 16:23:48 2007
New Revision: 123401
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123401
Log:
2007-04-01 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-01 16:29
---
Subject: Bug 31366
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Apr 1 16:29:05 2007
New Revision: 123402
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123402
Log:
2007-04-01 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-01 16:29
---
Subject: Bug 31207
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Apr 1 16:29:05 2007
New Revision: 123402
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123402
Log:
2007-04-01 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #39 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-01 18:32
---
Subject: Bug 31052
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Apr 1 18:32:20 2007
New Revision: 123403
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123403
Log:
2007-04-01 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #40 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-01 18:33
---
Subject: Bug 31052
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Apr 1 18:33:13 2007
New Revision: 123404
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123404
Log:
2007-04-01 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #42 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-02 14:35
---
Will keep open until we get them all!. Looks like I need another test case. :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31052
--- Comment #19 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-03 01:04
---
Yes, this is fixed, closing.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-03 14:50
---
I have a patch testing
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31201
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-04 00:28
---
Lahey reports this as a fatal syntax error.
Checking file SOURCE.F90.
Checking program unit TEST134 at line 1.
Line 2, file SOURCE.F90
1 FORMAT(())
| |
FATAL -- Essential LF90 requires that defined
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-06 16:39
---
Subject: Bug 31395
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 6 16:39:02 2007
New Revision: 123620
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123620
Log:
2007-04-06 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-06 16:42
---
Subject: Bug 31395
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Apr 6 16:42:26 2007
New Revision: 123621
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123621
Log:
2007-04-06 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-06 16:44
---
Fixed on trunk, may backport to 4.2.1
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-06 19:32
---
Confirmed: The relevant section in the standard is 3.3.1.3 . This diallows a
single '&' by it self on a line, but says nothing about two. Part of th
eproblem is we treat ' ' (a blank)
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-06 20:18
---
Index: scanner.c
===
--- scanner.c (revision 123528)
Here is a preliminary patch, I a, testing some combinations so the final patch
may vary from
Priority: P3
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31501
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-07 01:45
---
Created an attachment (id=13336)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13336&action=view)
Test case used to get a profile
This is a reference test case we can use to measure progress.
--
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-10 00:19
---
I am not sure this is formatted I/O related. I will investigate further, but I
suspect we are allocating buffer memory to write to memory and we should not
have to do that.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-13 07:52
---
I thought I would get around to this some day. Its noy high priority. More of
an oddity.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-14 00:40
---
I have not a chance to study this yet, but I will get to it sometime soon.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-14 03:10
---
My interpretation of the standard as quoted in the original post.
The value of POSITION can only be APPEND if we are positioned just before the
EOF record or if there is no EOF record and the position is at it&#
--- Comment #48 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-14 20:19
---
Created an attachment (id=13365)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13365&action=view)
A possible fix for sixtrack, again and again
hjl,
Would you please try this patch and se
--- Comment #50 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-15 02:55
---
Patch committed to trunk.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31052
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 03:44
---
I think you should just use read(10,*) or better yet, read the whole line into
a single string and search for the "=" in the string, noting the_position, then
use read(stringname(the_position:),*) inpu
--- Comment #13 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 04:00
---
I believe this was a regression against 4.1. It was introduced by the record
marker patch. I need to build latest 4.1 and test. I will report here teh
results.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
--- Comment #14 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 05:01
---
This one is a regression against g77. 4.1 fails as well. It passes the .f
version of the test case with g77.
I will backport to 4.2 and 4.1
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31366
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31409
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 05:25
---
Its not a regression, but I would like to keep track of this for 4.2.1 along
with 31051
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 05:35
---
Subject: Bug 31366
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Apr 18 05:35:41 2007
New Revision: 123940
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123940
Log:
2007-04-17 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #16 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 05:37
---
Subject: Bug 31366
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Apr 18 05:37:12 2007
New Revision: 123941
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123941
Log:
2007-04-17 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #17 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 05:42
---
Will not fix on 4.1. Fixed on 4.2 and 4.3
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 05:48
---
This could be as simple as the error messages returned by the OS don't match
what we put in the test case. Try changing:
call abort()
to:
print *, msg
This will then print the error messages inste
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 06:03
---
I can confirm this behavior. Putting a flush(6) before the call fixes this, so
it is within the language to handle this. I am marking this as minor and I
will get to it after a few other things I need to get
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 06:12
---
Looking at sf_read in transfer.c, we can see that we are reading one character
at a time with internal units. This was done for external units because we can
not anticipate where the end of the file is until we
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 14:51
---
output.tar attachment should go to pr31409
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31207
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-18 15:01
---
hmm, I will investigate.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31618
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-19 03:47
---
Confirming. g77 does not do it right either. :)
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-19 04:05
---
It looks like this platform has different error messages for a given error. I
suggest that this test case be either marked as expected to fail for this
platform or we could delete the test case altogether
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-21 22:34
---
Subject: Bug 31495
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Apr 21 22:34:04 2007
New Revision: 124022
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124022
Log:
2007-04-21 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-21 22:35
---
Fixed on trunk, closing
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-21 23:00
---
Subject: Bug 31495
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Apr 21 23:00:38 2007
New Revision: 124026
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=124026
Log:
2007-04-21 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-21 23:47
---
Thats an interesting approach. I am curious for the results. I also like the
adjustments to errors you have made.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31618
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 20:24
---
Created an attachment (id=13425)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13425&action=view)
Patch to improve read-sf
This patch knocks read_sf off the profile. Thats a start.
--
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 21:18
---
Created an attachment (id=13426)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13426&action=view)
Modified patch for further improvement
This modified patch, gets the time for the test case on my
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-22 22:09
---
Created an attachment (id=13427)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13427&action=view)
Refinement on the previous, using macros
With this patch I replaced is_array_io, is_internal_un
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-15 05:29
---
Subject: Bug 32752
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jul 15 05:29:29 2007
New Revision: 126652
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126652
Log:
2007-07-14 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-15 16:26
---
Subject: Bug 32611
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jul 15 16:26:22 2007
New Revision: 126654
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126654
Log:
2007-07-15 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-15 16:29
---
Subject: Bug 32611
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jul 15 16:29:19 2007
New Revision: 126655
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126655
Log:
2007-07-15 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-15 16:35
---
Subject: Bug 32611
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jul 15 16:35:07 2007
New Revision: 126656
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126656
Log:
2007-07-15 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-15 16:36
---
Fixed on trunk, closing
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-15 16:50
---
Fixed on trunk, no backport.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-17 02:25
---
Under Cygwin we get:
$ ./a.exe
At line 4 of file test.f90 (unit = 29, file = '')
Fortran runtime error: File 'con' already exists
con is a reserved device name from MS DOS:
See http://www.
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-17 04:26
---
It does not work with WRITE. If you replace the PRINT statement inside foo
with an equivalent WRITE statement, you get the same error. The public ::
print symbol is getting used by the PRINT statement rather
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-17 04:38
---
I will investigate further, but if all its trying to do is WRITE to the console
use WRITE(unit=6) and don't give it a filename at all. You don't even need to
OPEN it. It will be OPENed implicitly for
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-18 02:54
---
I can't get anything to work, but I have some ideas.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-19 02:10
---
This bug has been fixed in 4.3. This was pr32223. There are no plans to back
port this at the moment. Have you tried using binaries for 4.3 from Fortran
wiki?
Or build it youself?
*** This bug has been
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-19 02:10
---
*** Bug 32814 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-19 02:19
---
Paul, in response to your recent concern on the ml, I am going to start
chipping at this.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-20 20:54
---
The WTITEing of "Infinity" is dependent on the following C code in io/write.c
res = isfinite (n);
if (res == 0)
So if the isfinite function is broken on this system, that would explain th
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-20 21:01
---
Additional note: isfinite may be getting redefined in libgfortran.h
/* The isfinite macro is only available with C99, but some non-C99
systems still provide fpclassify, and there is a `finite' function
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-20 21:41
---
Try this:
#include
#include
#include
int
main ()
{
double x, y;
x = 1.79769313486231570814527423731704356798070567526e+308;
printf("%52.47e\n", x);
printf("isfinite = %d\n", is
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-20 22:21
---
Can you post the config.h file from your build directory?
blddir/archdir/libgfortran/config.h
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32841
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-21 19:39
---
The following simple patch enables gfortran to run for the tet case. I need to
get the proper #ifdef #endif condition set up and do a similar thing for CONIN$
and CONERR$ ( or whatever the windows equivalents
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-21 23:08
---
Here is a complete patch, tested on Cygwin. I need to test on mingw. Can
anyone help with that?
Index: unix.c
===
--- unix.c (revision
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-22 04:03
---
Subject: Bug 32752
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jul 22 04:02:57 2007
New Revision: 126822
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126822
Log:
2007-07-21 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-22 04:03
---
Subject: Bug 32678
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jul 22 04:02:57 2007
New Revision: 126822
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126822
Log:
2007-07-21 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-22 04:05
---
Subject: Bug 32678
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Jul 22 04:05:00 2007
New Revision: 126823
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126823
Log:
2007-07-21 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-22 04:06
---
Closing, fixed on 4.2.2 not worth 4.1 unless someone really needs it.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-22 04:08
---
Daniel, I bet this is related to the print foo bug you were working on. Same
kind of thing. Will you take a further look?
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-22 14:21
---
Yes, I found similar on Cygwin, so I am still at it on this one.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32784
--- Comment #13 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-23 02:59
---
Created an attachment (id=13950)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13950&action=view)
Patch to provide conio support
Danny, can you please check this new patch. Works on Cygwin as f
--- Comment #14 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-23 04:41
---
Created an attachment (id=13951)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13951&action=view)
Update patch
This one does not fail when there is no filename, :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/b
--- Comment #16 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-23 05:46
---
I tried my latest updated patch in DOS terminal window as you suggested and it
works OK, provided the file name is CONOUT$. If it is con or CON, I get an
error of file already exists. I will think about that
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-25 04:45
---
There were two modifications between these revs:
123620 format.c
123623 write.c
I will take this on.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #13 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-25 05:28
---
This is interesting. Using valgrind induces a problem with huge(1.0_10) on
x86-64
[EMAIL PROTECTED] test]$ ./a.out
3.4028235E+38 1.797693134862316E+308 1.1897314953572317650E+4932
[EMAIL PROTECTED] test
--- Comment #18 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-25 23:00
---
More info for everyone.
Under Cygwin, reading and writing from/to /dev/conin$ and /dev/conout$
respectively works fine with gfortran now. (Thanks David Korn for info)
I think this is sufficient for Cygwin
--- Comment #19 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-25 23:35
---
Regarding my comment #18 on cygwin. There should be no dollar signs in the
device name.
Thus: /dev/conout and /dev/conin
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32784
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-26 04:02
---
The following seems to allow the test case to compile without error:
Index: primary.c
===
--- primary.c (revision 126937)
+++ primary.c
--- Comment #13 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-26 04:56
---
I will prepare a submittal to the list. Regression tested OK too.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-26 05:35
---
This fixes the infinite recursive loop and fixes a segfault I was getting on
the original test case. The test case in comment #8 is something different.
Index: resolve.c
--- Comment #16 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-25 22:38
---
Dominique,
Maybe you could try to delete the conditional defines that redefine isfinite so
that the native calls are used and see if the problem goes away.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-26 04:54
---
This test case appears to execute correctly:
module gfcbug68
implicit none
public :: write
contains
function foo (i)
integer, intent(in) :: i
integer foo
write (*,*) i
foo = i
end
--- Comment #16 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-27 16:30
---
Subject: Bug 32760
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Jul 27 16:30:10 2007
New Revision: 126981
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126981
Log:
2007-07-27 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
--- Comment #17 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-27 16:34
---
Subject: Bug 32760
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Jul 27 16:33:50 2007
New Revision: 126982
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126982
Log:
2007-07-27 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAI
801 - 900 of 3058 matches
Mail list logo
