https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[4.8/4.9 Regression]|[4.8/4.9/4.10 Regression]
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
--- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Reduced test
CHARACTER*29 LINE1, LINE2
CHARACTER*128 LINEL, LINED, LINEF, FNPOL
INTEGER :: i, IA, IA1, IA2, NBL, NIPOL, NJPOL, LU
INTEGER :: IRETYP = 1, IMATYP = 1
INTEG
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
--- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
The change occurred between revisions r158253 (2010-04-13, "working?") and
r162456 (2010-07-23, error). It could be r161021 (pr44477).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
--- Comment #17 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I wonder if the gfortran present behavior is not the *RIGHT* one. It is
obviously for any READ following 'CALL BOTTOM(LU)', I am not 100% confident for
WRITE. Not that replacing
90 RETURN
with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
--- Comment #18 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> It could be r161021 (pr44477).
Read r161020 and the error message has been introduced in
libgfortran/io/transfer.c at this revision.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
--- Comment #19 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
I have rebuilt a clean Xfoil with the following patch
--- src_orig/xpol.f2007-09-16 03:56:31.0 +0200
+++ src/xpol.f2014-07-12 19:55:40.0 +0200
@@ -606,8 +606,7 @@ C add po
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
--- Comment #20 from Jerry DeLisle ---
I think gfortran behavior is correct. The problem with the sample code is in
the lack of handling in subroutine BOTTOM. The loop is reading past the end of
the file. END= is not a true error condition, but
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
--- Comment #21 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #20)
> Based on this I believe the resolution of this bug is 'INVALID'. ...
I fully agree. If there is no objection before next Wednesday (July 23, 21014),
I'l
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
Manfred Schwarb changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||manfred99 at gmx dot ch
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
--- Comment #23 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Jerry, concerning your cited standard:
> "If the file contains an endfile record" suggests that there is some
> special marker in the file to be read/written.
>From the standard:
> NOTE 9.2
> An e
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
--- Comment #24 from Jerry DeLisle ---
(In reply to Manfred Schwarb from comment #22)
--- snip ---
> Jerry, concerning your cited standard:
> "If the file contains an endfile record" suggests that there is some
> special marker in the file to be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
--- Comment #25 from Manfred Schwarb ---
OK, thanks Jerry and Dominique for the explanations.
It seems the correct syntax then is:
READ(lun,END=100) buffer
GOTO 101
100 BACKSPACE(lun)
101 WRITE(lun,*) "whatever"
Not that the abo
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59513
--- Comment #26 from Manfred Schwarb ---
I just tested g77.
As suspected, g77 is in line with gfortran 4.5.
It happily accepts the following and does not throw an error
in the END clause case:
READ(lun,END=100) buffer
100 WRITE(lun,*) "wh
13 matches
Mail list logo