>> but helpful for gfortran users ? >The problem is that a similar sentence would then need to be >added to other intrinsic subroutines/functions where an actual >argument might produce a result that is out-of-range of the >representable entity.
So, I could remove the sentence if there is consensus. >> maybe you could prepare a patch to add something like that to the >> section on intrinsics? > >Sure, I'll come up with a statement to be added to Sec. 8.1 of >the gfortran manual. actually, it is more complicated, since gfortran does support things such as NaN, and Inf, depending on the hardware and the compilation options.
