https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31190
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31190
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31190
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #9 from Domin
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-18 22:22
---
Unassigning, too low priority. This would be a good one for any beginners to
start learning the I/O formatting stuff. If you are interested in working
this, let me help. Glad to mentor.
--
jvdelisle at gcc
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-22 06:33
---
Here is another variation on this:
print'(xg0)',(i,i=1,6)
print'(6(xg0))',(i,i=1,6)
end
$ ./a.out
1
2
3
4
5
6
1 2 3 4 5 6
$
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31190
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-22 06:23
---
I think that this PR could be considered resolved by the new g0 edit
descriptor.
If, for example, you have three items to emit, the following will do so
regardless of their type.
program minimal_output
integer
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-13 04:47
---
Putting this on my todo list
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-20 00:44
---
I think we can do the option case fairly straight forward, after we get some of
the more serious problems fixed. :)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31190
--- Comment #3 from vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com 2007-03-19 21:55 ---
I agree with comments #1 and #2 that minimal width and fixed width
list-directed I/O can be useful, and I don't think gfortran should change its
default list-directed output, because some people may be relying, unwisely
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-17 11:39
---
Confirmed as an possible enhancement, though I agree there a both pros and
cons. (My personal opinion is that I prefer the fixed-width version.)
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-15 21:03 ---
> A compiler option that used a minimal width for output
> for list directed WRITEs would be convenient.
There are pros and cons for both.
Assume:
print *,(huge(0),i=1,6)
print*,(i,i=1,6)
print*,(i,i=1,600
11 matches
Mail list logo
