||jvdelisle at gcc dot
||gnu.org
Resolution||WORKSFORME
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-01-28
15:59:19 UTC ---
I tried on windows with Cygwin and it works fine. Your version is really pretty
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47285
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-01-28
22:35:47 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Jan 28 22:35:43 2011
New Revision: 169375
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169375
Log:
2011-01-28 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47434
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-01-29
17:31:07 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Jan 29 17:31:04 2011
New Revision: 169390
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169390
Log:
2011-01-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47434
--- Comment #11 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-01-29
17:33:39 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Jan 29 17:33:36 2011
New Revision: 169391
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169391
Log:
2011-01-29 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47434
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47293
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-01
02:29:21 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Feb 1 02:29:18 2011
New Revision: 169466
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169466
Log:
2011-01-31 Jerry DeLisle
PR libquadmath
||2011.02.01 13:48:33
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jvdelisle at gcc dot
|gnu.org |gnu.org
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-01
13:48:33 UTC ---
On it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47583
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-05
01:32:42 UTC ---
For this special case:
print "(F1.0)", 0.0 ! => 0 expected *
Up to now, we have interpreted the last sentence in F95 10.5.1.2.1 F95 10.2.1.1
to require this to print '0'.
"Leadi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-05
02:10:39 UTC ---
With:
print "(F0.0)", 0.001 ! => 0.
print "(F0.0)", 0.01 ! => 0.
print "(F0.0)", 0.1 ! => 0.
print "(F1.0)", -0.0 ! => 0
print "(F1.0)", 0.001 ! => *
print "(F1.0)", 0.01 ! => *
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-05
06:22:03 UTC ---
Created attachment 23251
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23251
A proposed patch
This patch regression tests OK and gives the results shown in my last comment.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47613
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-05
13:15:08 UTC ---
I completely understand your position on '*' vs '0'
At the time we first implemented showing that special case with zero, we had a
bit of discussion on it. It was clear that the stand
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47613
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-05
17:57:09 UTC ---
Do you have environment variables set for buffering or non-buffering? I am on
Fedora 14 and don't see it. Its puzzling. Have you tried clean bootstrap with
an empty install directory
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-05
17:58:51 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Feb 5 17:58:48 2011
New Revision: 169853
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169853
Log:
2011-02-05 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47293
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47267
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
||jvdelisle at gcc dot
||gnu.org
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jvdelisle at gcc dot
|gnu.org |gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-07
02:57:42 UTC ---
Might as well
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-08
12:36:19 UTC ---
OK, thanks for spotting that. I will have a look.
||jvdelisle at gcc dot
||gnu.org
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jvdelisle at gcc dot
|gnu.org |gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-08
12:40:48 UTC ---
Looks like
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47642
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-08
13:00:49 UTC ---
Jakub, if you have time to fix this, please do. It may take me several days to
get to this because of time constraints.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47642
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-08
20:25:12 UTC ---
I am OK with using stdio-common/printf_fp.c as well. Also, after the 42 digits
we do not need to go further and can chop it maybe with a few zeros padded. At
least gfortran performas
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47583
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-09
05:17:51 UTC ---
I will test and commit the patch. Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47583
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-09
06:07:18 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Feb 9 06:07:14 2011
New Revision: 169962
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=169962
Log:
2011-02-08 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/47
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47583
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47583
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-09
15:47:26 UTC ---
There is some debate whether or not I did this properly. I was rushing last
night, cobbled the PR number in the email subject, omitted the patch to the
mailing list, left the pr numb
||2011.02.10 03:37:59
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jvdelisle at gcc dot
|gnu.org |gnu.org
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-10
03:37:59 UTC ---
I am working it.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47667
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-10
19:27:56 UTC ---
The problem is straight forward. We are pending on IO inside a condition
expressiom. I will restucture the code to avoid this.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47667
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-11
06:20:15 UTC ---
Probable patch:
Index: list_read.c
===
--- list_read.c(revision 170042)
+++ list_read.c(working copy)
@@ -1726,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47692
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47694
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-11
20:06:41 UTC ---
See http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.5.2/gfortran/Runtime.html#Runtime
and try these.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47694
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-15
00:57:36 UTC ---
I started to look at this problem a few days ago and will give it some priority
in the next few days. I do think we can fix this in a more efficient manner
(knock on wood). Let's see
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47694
--- Comment #12 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-17
01:07:20 UTC ---
the "file" is not seekable so the position eturne by seek always returns zero.
I plane to see if we can do something with the seek to get it to return a
position within fbuf. If tha
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47692
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-17
01:12:44 UTC ---
Always set LD_LIBRARY_PATH or another way is to compile with -static to make
sure the correct runtime functions get invoked.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-17
05:19:54 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Thu Feb 17 05:19:50 2011
New Revision: 170239
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170239
Log:
2011-02-16 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47694
--- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-17
12:54:58 UTC ---
In reply to comment #13: Well, I was thinking fbuf_seek. I came to the
conclusion that I do not want to change the API for read_sf for the reasons you
state.
I am now focusing on re
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47778
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-17
19:22:31 UTC ---
I will try to look at this one this weekend.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47667
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-17
19:28:53 UTC ---
Manually pasted here, typo on PR number.
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Thu Feb 17 05:19:50 2011
New Revision: 170239
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170239
Log:
2011-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #16 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-17
19:30:47 UTC ---
Disregard comment #15, typo in PR number
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47667
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
||
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jvdelisle at gcc dot
|gnu.org |gnu.org
--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-19
00:12:06 UTC ---
Created attachment 23402
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23402
A propo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #17 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-19
15:10:58 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Feb 19 15:10:55 2011
New Revision: 170318
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170318
Log:
2011-02-19 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #18 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-19
15:21:10 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Feb 19 15:21:05 2011
New Revision: 170319
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170319
Log:
2011-02-19 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
||2011.02.19 15:52:35
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jvdelisle at gcc dot
|gnu.org |gnu.org
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-19
15:52:35 UTC ---
A reduced test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #21 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-21
14:22:51 UTC ---
OK, can you tell I am time slicing this one. ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #22 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-21
14:32:14 UTC ---
On my system I get with:
print *, "--"
print "(F0.0)", -0.0 ! => -0.
print "(F3.0)", -0.0 ! => -0.
print "(F2.0)", -0.0 ! => **
print "(F1.0)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47778
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-21
14:35:20 UTC ---
Status update. I have more or less isolated the problem in list-read.c. I do
not have an exact solution yet, but I am able to get the test case to work. I
just need now to find the ri
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #23 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-24
04:52:05 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Thu Feb 24 04:52:00 2011
New Revision: 170458
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170458
Log:
2011-02-23 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #24 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-24
05:10:41 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Thu Feb 24 05:10:37 2011
New Revision: 170461
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170461
Log:
2011-02-23 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47878
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-24
13:51:09 UTC ---
We are going to need some sort of reduced test case or revert the patch.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47878
--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-24
16:03:41 UTC ---
Jakub's suggestion is probably OK. I am not at a place where I can do and
test.
My only concern, is there a chance that we would backup passed the beginning of
the buffer? Maybe mak
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47878
--- Comment #17 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-24
17:07:06 UTC ---
C14, my browser here is not displaying the comment numbers, odd.
You will see where we set the eor number to 1 or 2 depending on what was found.
That can be used to adjust n if neede
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47878
--- Comment #18 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-24
17:10:50 UTC ---
The old code did this:
fbuf_seek (dtp->u.p.current_unit, n + seen_comma, SEEK_CUR);
So we could adjust for comma as well.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47878
--- Comment #21 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-24
18:27:42 UTC ---
This is OK and do add the close with status = "delete"
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47878
--- Comment #22 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-24
18:30:38 UTC ---
Just to be clear;
Created attachment 23456 [details]
gcc46-pr47878.patch
is approved. It has to be right, look at that attachment number!
;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47778
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-27
07:39:37 UTC ---
Probable Patch, Regression testing:
Index: list_read.c
===
--- list_read.c(revision 170492)
+++ list_read.c(wor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47778
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-27
20:06:13 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Feb 27 20:06:10 2011
New Revision: 170548
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170548
Log:
2011-02-27 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47778
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-27
20:08:47 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sun Feb 27 20:08:44 2011
New Revision: 170549
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170549
Log:
2011-02-27 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47778
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-27
20:10:30 UTC ---
Fixed on trunk. I will leave this PR open until I get the back ports done. I
want to give this change a few days on trunk first.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #28 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-02-28
21:19:35 UTC ---
New patch which passes Programmatic test case has been submitted for approval.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #29 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-01
02:24:52 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Mar 1 02:24:50 2011
New Revision: 170585
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170585
Log:
2011-02-28 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #30 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-01
02:28:04 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Mar 1 02:28:02 2011
New Revision: 170586
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170586
Log:
2011-02-28 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortra
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47567
--- Comment #31 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-01
02:29:43 UTC ---
Thomas, can this be closed yet?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47933
--- Comment #1 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-01
05:59:11 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Mar 1 05:59:07 2011
New Revision: 170587
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170587
Log:
2011-02-28 Jerry DeLisle
PR libgfortran
||jvdelisle at gcc dot
||gnu.org
Resolution||FIXED
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-01
06:01:20 UTC ---
Fixed, I ran the test in my local directory and forgot to run in the test
suite.
Mea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47694
--- Comment #23 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-04
14:42:57 UTC ---
Final fix was added here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?view=revision&revision=170476
For reference when we back port this to 4.5.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47878
--- Comment #27 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-05
00:05:40 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Mar 5 00:05:34 2011
New Revision: 170692
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170692
Log:
2011-03-04 Jakub Jelinek
Backport from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47694
--- Comment #24 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-05
00:05:40 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Sat Mar 5 00:05:34 2011
New Revision: 170692
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170692
Log:
2011-03-04 Jakub Jelinek
Backport from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47694
--- Comment #25 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-05
00:21:21 UTC ---
Fixed on 4.5 and trunk, I am preparing a back port for 4.4.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47694
--- Comment #27 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-05
15:40:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> What's about the following? I assume that's a 4.7 item?
>
> (In reply to comment #18)
> > 2) Fix io/read.c(read_x) in the same way to use fbuf_getc instea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47850
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47850
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-03-05
19:17:58 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> This is suspicious. I don't see it in the ChangeLog and is probably a merge
> artifact.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs/trunk/gcc/fortran/arith.c?r1=155179
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46703
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57633
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle ---
We need to audit all places where '\n' is used and make sure we are taking care
of the '\r' properly in read.c , etc.
Then review what were are doing when we get a premature end of record.
Maybe we are skipp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50105
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle 2011-08-22
03:37:30 UTC ---
I just returned from travel and will have a look at this.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53796
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle 2012-06-29
09:55:43 UTC ---
IIRC recl is an unsigned integer? I will look further on this one.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53796
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle 2012-06-29
10:13:13 UTC ---
Yes, I am talking about our internal representation. I have to go look at the
code detail yet, I am just thinking out loud here on the bug report. It is one
possibility of what we are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53796
--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle 2012-06-29
23:43:23 UTC ---
We have more then one thing to fix here.
Try this variation:
integer(kind=8) :: s, r
open(unit=1, file='testsize.f90', status='old', recl=500)
inquire(unit=1, size=s, recl=r)
print *
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53796
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle 2012-06-30
00:32:29 UTC ---
For completeness, in the case I give in Comment #9, I get
Operating system error: Cannot allocate memory
Memory allocation failed
I have instrumented a few places to see what we are
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53796
--- Comment #11 from Jerry DeLisle 2012-06-30
01:35:12 UTC ---
Maybe a new PR for this is in order.
gdb output with test case in Comment #9
(gdb)
634 if (flags->form == FORM_FORMATTED)
(gdb)
636 if ((opp->common.flags & IOPARM_O
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51825
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle 2012-02-15
17:08:51 UTC ---
I have been working on this one. The order of the lines within the namelist
file can cause the error to go away. I have also found that the read of the
character string acutally compl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52387
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle 2012-03-01
01:48:23 UTC ---
Are all the cards played here yet? I assume we won't waste time implementing
any changes until the requirements are clearly understood. Please ping me when
that point is reached. Th
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52439
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52539
--- Comment #1 from Jerry DeLisle 2012-03-10
14:33:14 UTC ---
I remember this being discussed before. Lets check the standard regarding
encoding for namelists.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52724
--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle 2012-03-29
01:05:20 UTC ---
I am curious about what this line is doing:
buffer4 = 4_'123'
buffer4 is a kind=1 variable. have you tried: character(kind=4) buffer4(100) ?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38199
--- Comment #19 from Jerry DeLisle 2012-04-15
14:17:43 UTC ---
I think this can be closed. Thanks Thomas! The last patch is simple enough to
consider a backport.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52428
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle 2012-04-25
00:29:00 UTC ---
I respectfully disagree. The Fortran model is/was developed over many years
with many knowledgeable people investing time into it of good reasons. Some
may disagree,but it is what it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38199
--- Comment #26 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Test case from Comment #22
ifort:
real0m0.608s
user0m0.464s
sys0m0.080s
gfortran:
real0m22.893s
user0m21.059s
sys0m0.152s
Obviously we could do better.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38199
--- Comment #27 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Getting my self up to speed here. I reviewed what we have going on with this.
Currently we call a function called eat_spaces to do what is needed.
Naturally, to keep track of all the flags and counters, ea
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59108
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59419
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I will take this one if you like.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59419
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jvdelisle at gcc dot
gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59419
--- Comment #6 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Patch submitted for review.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59419
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Dec 17 03:06:04 2013
New Revision: 206039
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=206039&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-12-16 Jerry DeLisle
PR libfortran/59419
* io/file_pos.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25708
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|jvdelisle at gcc dot|unassigned at gcc dot
|
101 - 200 of 2283 matches
Mail list logo
