Dear Uros,
Thanks for that. It is not a problem that I encountered on either the
32 bit or 64 bit machines that I use but, as you say, an underflow is
the most likely explanation. I guess that without any loss, as far as
the test is concerned, a test that obj%c(i,j) is greater than 1e-5,
say, could have been done before raising it to the fourth power!
Cheers
Paul
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> -mieee is needed for this runtime test to avoid
>
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_8.f03 -O0 execution test
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_8.f03 -Os execution test
>
> on alpha-linux-gnu.
>
> Probably underflow, or something exceptional, gdb is not a friend with
> fortran code on this target:
>
> Program received signal SIGFPE, Arithmetic exception.
> 0x0000000120004190 in cartesian_2d_objects::process_cart2d_p (obj=...)
> at
> /home/uros/gcc-svn/trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_8.f03:172
> 172 process_cart2d_p%c = -sign (obj%c, 1.0)*obj%c** 4
> (gdb)
>
> 2012-01-03 Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>
>
> * gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_8.f03: Use dg-add-options ieee.
>
> Tested on alphaev68-unknown-linux-gnu, committed to mainline SVN.
>
> Uros.
>
> Index: gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_8.f03
> ===================================================================
> --- gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_8.f03 (revision 182853)
> +++ gfortran.dg/typebound_operator_8.f03 (working copy)
> @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
> ! { dg-do run }
> +! { dg-add-options ieee }
> !
> ! Solve a diffusion problem using an object-oriented approach
> !
--
The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.
--Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy
