[Bug libfortran/33469] Default formats for real input are not precise enough

2007-10-03 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #11 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-03 19:34 --- BTW I have forgotten to explain why I have to use an auxiliary variable 'z': if I usenearest(0.0_8,1.0_8); I get default_format_1_db.f90:70.29: if (abs(x-y)>nearest(0.0_8,1.0_8)) print *, x, y, x-y

[Bug libfortran/33469] Default formats for real input are not precise enough

2007-10-03 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #10 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-03 19:30 --- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/default_format_1.f90 passes the test if I replace if (y /= x) res = res + 1 by z=0.0_k if (abs(x-y)>nearest(z,1.0_k)) res = res + 1 in the two places of test_r8,

[Bug libfortran/33469] Default formats for real input are not precise enough

2007-10-02 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-02 23:30 --- As I said, the default format is wide enough for powerpc-darwin. It's widely possible that the new testcase gfortran.dg/default_format_2.f90 fails there, though, due to the Apple printf() bug. Dominique, if you co

[Bug libfortran/33469] Default formats for real input are not precise enough

2007-10-02 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-02 23:28 --- Subject: Bug 33469 Author: fxcoudert Date: Tue Oct 2 23:27:51 2007 New Revision: 128967 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128967 Log: PR libfortran/33469 * io/write.c (write

[Bug libfortran/33469] Default formats for real input are not precise enough

2007-10-02 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #7 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-02 08:29 --- Subject: Re: Default formats for real input are not precise enough > Part of it is simply a libc bug. There are numbers close to 1.0 and -1.0 that > the darwin libc can't output properly: Nice catch! The problem a

[Bug libfortran/33469] Default formats for real input are not precise enough

2007-10-01 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-02 00:37 --- (In reply to comment #5) > Hum, the real(16) case looks like loads of fun to come! Part of it is simply a libc bug. There are numbers close to 1.0 and -1.0 that the darwin libc can't output properly: $ cat k2.c

[Bug libfortran/33469] Default formats for real input are not precise enough

2007-10-01 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-01 23:28 --- Hum, the real(16) case looks like loads of fun to come! $ cat k.f90 integer, parameter :: k = 16 character(80) :: buf real(k) :: xk, yk xk = 1.0_k - epsilon(xk) write (buf,'(1PG60.40)') xk read (buf,

[Bug libfortran/33469] Default formats for real input are not precise enough

2007-09-19 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-09-19 12:38 --- Subject: Re: Add one digit to the default formatted output > Dominique, what is the output of your test program on ppc-darwin? real(4) default 808 1PG20.61881 1PG20.7 808 1PG20.8

[Bug libfortran/33469] Default formats for real input are not precise enough

2007-09-19 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
-- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|enhancement |normal Component|fortran |libfortran