--- Comment #7 from milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2007-02-04 22:56 ---
Subject: Re: equivalence modifies common block
pault == pault at gcc dot gnu dot org [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
pault --- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
pault 2007-02-04 12:03 --- I
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: milan at cmm dot ki dot si
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30689
--- Comment #3 from milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2007-02-03 23:52 ---
I am sorry for misunderstanding the program. I just took out of something big,
to show some weird behavior of COMMON and EQUIVALENCE. As you can imagine
-fdefault-integer-8 trick is the only solution to make those old 1
--- Comment #4 from milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2007-02-04 00:13 ---
OK, maybe gfortran is right. It doesn't make much sense to me, but this is what
I found from wikipedia links in its fortran entry:
Variables and arrays in common blocks can appear in EQUIVALENCE statements but
this has
Product: gcc
Version: 4.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: milan at cmm dot ki dot si
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: milan at cmm dot ki dot si
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30450
--- Comment #3 from milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2007-01-12 18:23 ---
Subject: Re: calling subroutine with constant parameter
pinskia == pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
pinskia --- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
pinskia 2007-01-12
--- Comment #18 from milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2005-12-29 07:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=10564)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10564action=view)
patch against gcc-4.1-20051223
As requested, I am posting Rob's patch which goes against the Dec 23 snapshot.
I
--- Comment #17 from milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2005-12-26 15:54 ---
(In reply to comment #16)
Created an attachment (id=10296)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10296action=view) [edit]
Patch to change delimitters to 4 bytes for unformatted records
This is nearly
--- Comment #15 from milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2005-11-19 19:09 ---
I didn 't know how to compile gcc-4.1... so I couldn't reply before. I realised
I have to install both mpfr and gmp libraries for gcc to compile. It complains
only about gmp :-(
Yes, this patch works OK. I had
ReportedBy: milan at cmm dot ki dot si
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24945
--- Additional Comments From milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2005-05-31 08:41
---
Great work! Thanks a million!
Somehow I also have a problem with the name of the option, since g77 has exactly
the same problem. When I compile with the g77 I get 8 byte headers on AMD64, so
the name g77
--- Additional Comments From milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2005-04-20 01:10
---
(In reply to comment #10)
Can you try with a later build and tell us what your exact source and output
is?
OK, now it is fixed! I had to wait one more week to get the new snapshot.
Thank you very much
--
Bug 19292 depends on bug 17992, which changed state.
Bug 17992 Summary: [4.0 only] reading empty line does not return 0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17992
What|Old Value |New Value
--- Additional Comments From milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2005-04-20 01:14
---
(In reply to comment #1)
Can you try compiling your code with a compiler from
today's source (2005-05-10)? Thomas Koenig just committed
several fixes for handling End-of-Record.
I had to wait another week
: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: milan at cmm dot ki dot si
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20932
--- Additional Comments From milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2005-04-11 00:42
---
(In reply to comment #1)
Can you try compiling your code with a compiler from
today's source (2005-05-10)? Thomas Koenig just committed
several fixes for handling End-of-Record.
I renamed the ebuild, so
--- Additional Comments From milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2005-04-11 00:46
---
(In reply to comment #6)
Fixed in 4.1.0, waiting for inclusion into 4.0.
I just tried 4.1-20050410 and the problem is still there. So what was fixed? Or
maybe the patches are not in this snapshot yet
--- Additional Comments From milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2005-04-11 01:58
---
(In reply to comment #8)
(In reply to comment #7)
(In reply to comment #6)
Fixed in 4.1.0, waiting for inclusion into 4.0.
I just tried 4.1-20050410 and the problem is still there. So what
--- Additional Comments From milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2005-01-06 23:16
---
we are trying to read 3 things, the '/' which consumes the first /n, then two
numbers (each I2). the file has 2 /n's in it.
I simplified thing and threw out the / from format specification. If I put 2
record header
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: libfortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: milan at cmm dot ki dot si
CC
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: milan at cmm dot ki dot si
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17992
22 matches
Mail list logo
