[Bug fortran/21931] problem with fugly-logint flag and evaluating if statements

[bdavis9659 at comcast dot net]

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||repucul at link dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21931

[Bug fortran/21931] problem with fugly-logint flag and evaluating if statements

[bdavis9659 at comcast dot net]

--- Additional Comments From bdavis9659 at comcast dot net  2005-09-09 
14:38 ---
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-09/msg00266.html

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21931

[Bug fortran/21931] problem with fugly-logint flag and evaluating if statements

[bdavis9659 at comcast dot net]

--- Additional Comments From bdavis9659 at comcast dot net  2005-06-25 
13:58 ---

here are some things i have found while researching this:


First, this patch:
2002-05-09  Hassan Aurag  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

* expr.c (ffeexpr_reduced_ugly2log_): Allow logicals-as-integers
under -fugly-logint as arguments of .and., .or., .xor.

which was then reverted after discussion about what -fugly-logint is supposed 
to do:

2003-11-24  Toon Moene  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR fortran/12633
* expr.c (ffeexpr_reduced_ugly2log_): Revert
change allowing logical .and. logical to be
integer in expressions when -fugly-logint.

And then another patch which was supposed to "do the right thing":

2004-01-13  Ian Lance Taylor  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

PR fortran/6491
* expr.c (ffeexpr_reduce_): When handling AND, OR, and XOR, and
when using -fugly-logint, if both operands are logical, convert
the result back to logical.
(ffeexpr_reduced_ugly2log_): Add bothlogical parameter.  Change
all callers.  Convert logical operands to integer.





-- 
   What|Removed |Added

 CC||bbsnider at link dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21931

[Bug fortran/21931] problem with fugly-logint flag and evaluating if statements

[bdavis9659 at comcast dot net]

--- Additional Comments From bdavis9659 at comcast dot net  2005-06-25 
14:06 ---
in the interest of ensuring credit is given to who actually did the work, the
above analysis was done by [EMAIL PROTECTED] and posted by me.

--bud davis

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21931

[Bug libfortran/21621] Inconsistency with binary sequential output

[bdavis9659 at comcast dot net]

--- Additional Comments From bdavis9659 at comcast dot net  2005-05-31 
02:36 ---
proposed patch here:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-05/msg00431.html

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21621

[Bug libfortran/19303] Unformatted record header is 4-bytes on 32-bit targets

[bdavis9659 at comcast dot net]

--- Additional Comments From bdavis9659 at comcast dot net  2005-05-31 
02:37 ---
proposed patch that should fix this problem:

http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-05/msg00431.html

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19303

[Bug fortran/21931] problem with fugly-logint flag and evaluating if statements

[bdavis9659 at comcast dot net]

--- Additional Comments From bdavis9659 at comcast dot net  2005-06-10 
14:53 ---
the behavour of -fugly-logint changed between gcc3.2 and above.  which version
are you using ?


--bud davis

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21931

[Bug libfortran/14746] New: [gfortran] F edit descriptor creates wrong field width

[bdavis9659 at comcast dot net]

Distilled from NIST test FM101.FOR:

  RCON21 = 9.
  RCON22 = .9
  WRITE(*,'(F2.0,1H,,F2.1)')RCON21,RCON22
  END

$ gfortran b.f
$ ./a.out
9,**

first data item should be two wide (not sure if the '.' is required). The second
should not overflow.


$ g77 b.f
$ ./a.out
9.,.9
$ gfortran --version
GNU Fortran 95 (GCC 3.5-tree-ssa 20040326 (merged 20040307))

-- 
   Summary: [gfortran] F edit descriptor creates wrong field width
   Product: gcc
   Version: tree-ssa
Status: UNCONFIRMED
  Severity: normal
  Priority: P2
 Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: bdavis9659 at comcast dot net
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14746