[Bug fortran/107716] Getting negative values with NINT when using doubleprecision values in range on i386
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107716 --- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl --- On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 07:07:37PM +, mikael at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107716 > > --- Comment #5 from Mikael Morin --- > (In reply to kargl from comment #4) > > What the heck does "RESOLVED MOVED"? > > I think it means this PR is not a gcc bug and the problem is tracked on some > other project's bug tracker (it is "moved" there). > > Not sure where else the problem is tracked in this case. > Thanks, Mikael. After a bit of duck-duck-go, I've come to a similar conclusion. <$0.02> If a url/pointer to where the bug is actually tracked is not available, this status should not be used. It is useless. I'll also note that if one clicks on the 'status:' label a list of stati (statuses?) and their meaining can be found. MOVED is not among the list.
[Bug fortran/107716] Getting negative values with NINT when using doubleprecision values in range on i386
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107716 Mikael Morin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from Mikael Morin --- (In reply to kargl from comment #4) > What the heck does "RESOLVED MOVED"? I think it means this PR is not a gcc bug and the problem is tracked on some other project's bug tracker (it is "moved" there). Not sure where else the problem is tracked in this case.
[Bug fortran/107716] Getting negative values with NINT when using doubleprecision values in range on i386
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107716 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- What the heck does "RESOLVED MOVED"?
[Bug fortran/107716] Getting negative values with NINT when using doubleprecision values in range on i386
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107716 Xi Ruoyao changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|INVALID |MOVED CC||xry111 at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug fortran/107716] Getting negative values with NINT when using doubleprecision values in range on i386
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107716 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|WAITING |RESOLVED --- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Not a gcc bug. Please report to OpenBSD.
[Bug fortran/107716] Getting negative values with NINT when using doubleprecision values in range on i386
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107716
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Priority|P3 |P4
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed||2022-11-16
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to urbanjost from comment #1)
> I am on a Linux mint box using KVM and
> running a virtual box that is
>OpenBSD mo.my.domain 7.2 GENERIC#381 i386
>
It seems that you may have discovered a bug in OpenBSD.
% cat a.f90
function ibar(x) result(r)
integer r
real x
r = nint(x)
end function
% cat a.f90.005t.original
__attribute__((fn spec (". w ")))
integer(kind=4) ibar (real(kind=4) & restrict x)
{
integer(kind=4) r;
r = __builtin_iroundf (*x);
return r;
}
% grep call a.s
calllroundf
So, at least on FreeBSD, nint() is mapped to lroundf() from libm.
[Bug fortran/107716] Getting negative values with NINT when using doubleprecision values in range on i386
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107716 --- Comment #1 from urbanjost at comcast dot net --- I am on a Linux mint box using KVM and running a virtual box that is OpenBSD mo.my.domain 7.2 GENERIC#381 i386 using GNU Fortran (GCC) 11.2.0 and am getting negative values from NINT() on doubleprecision values when I do not expect them. I thought NINT() took any KIND of REAL so I did not expect that; but it has been a while since I ran on i386, and I am on a virtual box. If I do a NINT(REAL(value)) instead of NINT(value) I get the expected INTEGER value. Any reason I should expect NINT() to not work with values still within the range of the default INTEGER kind? Anyone have a 32-bit box with gfortran on it that could see if they start getting negative values with doubleprecision input values below HUGE(0)? > program testit > use,intrinsic :: iso_fortran_env, only : int8, int16, int32, int64 > use,intrinsic :: iso_fortran_env, only : real32, real64, real128 > implicit none > doubleprecision :: value > integer :: i > do i=0,huge(0)-1 > value=i > if(nint(value).lt.0)then > write(*,*)'VALUE:',value > write(*,*)'REAL(VALUE):',real(value) > write(*,*)'NINT(REAL(VALUE)):',nint(real(value)) > write(*,*)'NINT(VALUE):',nint(value-1) > write(*,*)'NINT(VALUE):',nint(value) > write(*,*)'NINT(VALUE):',nint(value+1) > write(*,*)'INT:',int(value-1) > write(*,*)'INT:',int(value) > write(*,*)'INT:',int(value+1) > exit > endif > enddo > write(*,*)'value:',value > write(*,*)'huge(0):',huge(0) > write(*,*)'huge(0_int64):',huge(0_int64) > write(*,*)'huge(0_int32):',huge(0_int32) > write(*,*)'huge(0_int16):',huge(0_int16) > write(*,*)'huge(0_int8):',huge(0_int8) > end program testit > >VALUE: 2097153.00 >REAL(VALUE): 2097153.00 >NINT(REAL(VALUE)): 2097153 >NINT(VALUE): 2097152 >NINT(VALUE): -1 >NINT(VALUE): 2097154 >INT: 2097152 >INT: 2097153 >INT: 2097154 >value: 2097153.00 >huge(0): 2147483647 >huge(0_int64): 9223372036854775807 >huge(0_int32): 2147483647 >huge(0_int16): 32767 >huge(0_int8): 127 It starts off with just odd numbers getting a -1 return
