[Bug fortran/32554] [4.3 regression] Bug in P formatting

2007-07-01 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-01 15:49 --- Subject: Bug 32554 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jul 1 15:49:37 2007 New Revision: 126174 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126174 Log: 2007-06-29 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[Bug fortran/32554] [4.3 regression] Bug in P formatting

2007-07-01 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-07-01 15:46 --- Subject: Bug 32554 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sun Jul 1 15:46:33 2007 New Revision: 126173 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=126173 Log: 2007-07-01 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[Bug fortran/32554] [4.3 regression] Bug in P formatting

2007-06-30 Thread patchapp at dberlin dot org
--- Comment #7 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-06-30 20:00 --- Subject: Bug number PR32554 A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker. The mailing list url for the patch is http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-06/msg02162.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh

[Bug fortran/32554] [4.3 regression] Bug in P formatting

2007-06-30 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |4.3.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32554

[Bug fortran/32554] [4.3 regression] Bug in P formatting

2007-06-29 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-30 05:03 --- There is an off by 1 error in the calculation of the number of digits. This is a latent bug uncovered by Janne's patch. Patch is on its way. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32554

[Bug fortran/32554] [4.3 regression] Bug in P formatting

2007-06-29 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-30 00:50 --- I agree, that's why I said I was not sure. I am thinking this is pretty odd. I am going to test snprintf to see if its broken. sprintf works fine as is. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32554

[Bug fortran/32554] [4.3 regression] Bug in P formatting

2007-06-29 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-30 00:32 --- (In reply to comment #3) > This appears to fix it but I am not sure yet. More testing. > > */ > #ifdef HAVE_SNPRINTF > - snprintf (buffer, sizeof (buffer), "%+-#" STR(MIN_FIELD_WIDTH) ".*" > + snprintf (buffer

[Bug fortran/32554] [4.3 regression] Bug in P formatting

2007-06-29 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-30 00:20 --- This appears to fix it but I am not sure yet. More testing. Index: write.c === --- write.c (revision 126131) +++ write.c (working copy) @@

[Bug fortran/32554] [4.3 regression] Bug in P formatting

2007-06-29 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-30 00:05 --- I have traced to this patch, the change in write.c: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=rev&revision=125100 Added Janne to cc -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed

[Bug fortran/32554] [4.3 regression] Bug in P formatting

2007-06-29 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-06-29 23:41 --- Confirmed. I will take this one. Hmm. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added --