From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29127 invoked by alias); 11 Nov 2005 04:52:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 29094 invoked by uid 48); 11 Nov 2005 04:52:53 -0000 Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 04:52:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20051111045253.29093.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/23815] Add -byteswapio flag In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org" X-SW-Source: 2005-11/txt/msg01552.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #14 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-11 04:52 ------- Thomas, I'm not in favor of environmental variables, which I think would also be Paul Brook's position. It's too easy to have the variables set or unset at the wrong time. OTOH, you're working on a patch, so it's up to you. What are your plans for REAL(10), REAL(16), INTEGER(16), COMPLEX(10), and COMPLEX(16)? AFAIK, the reals may have padding issues. -- kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23815