RE: [PATCH] PR fortran/62245 fix INT docs.

2014-09-05 Thread VandeVondele Joost
> OK. Committed revision 214958.

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/62245 fix INT docs.

2014-09-05 Thread Steve Kargl
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 11:16:02AM +, VandeVondele Joost wrote: > > >The last sentence above is not needed. > > So, revised patch without the last sentence. > > 2014-09-05 Joost VandeVondele > > PR fortran/62245 > * intrinsic.texi (INT): clarify result. > OK. -- Steve

RE: [PATCH] PR fortran/62245 fix INT docs.

2014-09-05 Thread VandeVondele Joost
> >The last sentence above is not needed. So, revised patch without the last sentence. 2014-09-05 Joost VandeVondele PR fortran/62245 * intrinsic.texi (INT): clarify result. Index: fortran/intrinsic.texi === ---

RE: [PATCH] PR fortran/62245 fix INT docs.

2014-08-24 Thread VandeVondele Joost
>> but helpful for gfortran users ? >The problem is that a similar sentence would then need to be >added to other intrinsic subroutines/functions where an actual >argument might produce a result that is out-of-range of the >representable entity. So, I could remove the sentence if there is conse

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/62245 fix INT docs.

2014-08-24 Thread Steve Kargl
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 03:58:42PM +, VandeVondele Joost wrote: > >> +of @var{A} and whose sign is the same as the sign of @var{A}. The result > >> +is undefined if it can not be represented as an @code{INTEGER} of the > >> +given @code{KIND}. > > > >The last sentence above is not needed. >

RE: [PATCH] PR fortran/62245 fix INT docs.

2014-08-24 Thread VandeVondele Joost
>> +of @var{A} and whose sign is the same as the sign of @var{A}. The result >> +is undefined if it can not be represented as an @code{INTEGER} of the >> +given @code{KIND}. > >The last sentence above is not needed. but helpful for gfortran users ? > There is a general > prohibition in 13.7.1 a

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/62245 fix INT docs.

2014-08-24 Thread Steve Kargl
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:47:18PM +, VandeVondele Joost wrote: > > One small ask: these lines are too long (already before your patch); > > can you please reformat those lines your patch touches to <80 columns? > > sure: > > +of @var{A} and whose sign is the same as the sign of @var{A}. Th

RE: [PATCH] PR fortran/62245 fix INT docs.

2014-08-24 Thread VandeVondele Joost
> One small ask: these lines are too long (already before your patch); > can you please reformat those lines your patch touches to <80 columns? sure: Index: intrinsic.texi === --- intrinsic.texi (revision 214408) +++ intrinsic.

Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/62245 fix INT docs.

2014-08-24 Thread Gerald Pfeifer
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014, VandeVondele Joost wrote: > A doc change to refine wording for result value of int, avoiding the > word range and using magnitude as does the standard. Mentions undefined > behavior. > > 2014-08-24 Joost VandeVondele > > PR fortran/62245 > * intrinsic.texi (

[PATCH] PR fortran/62245 fix INT docs.

2014-08-24 Thread VandeVondele Joost
A doc change to refine wording for result value of int, avoiding the word range and using magnitude as does the standard. Mentions undefined behavior. 2014-08-24 Joost VandeVondele PR fortran/62245 * intrinsic.texi (INT): clarify result and undefined behavior. Index: intrins