public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/26509] incorrect behaviour of error-handler for internal read
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 07:12:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060309071235.6761.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-26509-11277@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
------- Comment #12 from martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de 2006-03-09 07:12 -------
(In reply to comment #11)
> OK, after some discussion on comp.lang.fortran it is clear tha END and EOR are
> not error conditions. They are there to allow for example, reading in a loop
> until the end of a file is reached and branching out. A true error condition
> would be something like a disk failure and the like.
>
> So, if an application is anticipating hitting the End-of-File deliberately then
> use the END parameter. Likewise for EOR.
I agree completely for the reading case. But if I have a file open for writing
and try to write 8 bytes into a 4-byte record, shouldn't we jump to the ERR=
label? Unfortunately there is no support for EOR= in WRITE statements.
This feels a bit like an inconsistency in the standard.
> The most portable method to handle things is to use IOSTAT and test for the
> conditions of interest.
Yes, I think I'll suggest this to the Starlink people.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26509
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-03-09 7:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-01 12:36 [Bug debug/26509] New: " kloedej at knmi dot nl
2006-03-01 23:30 ` [Bug fortran/26509] " pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-02 3:58 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-03 0:37 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-05 3:07 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-05 3:17 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-05 18:01 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-06 14:33 ` martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de
2006-03-07 16:30 ` dir at lanl dot gov
2006-03-08 1:13 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-08 1:16 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-09 6:39 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-09 7:12 ` martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de [this message]
2006-03-09 14:56 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-09 15:11 ` martin at mpa-garching dot mpg dot de
2006-03-10 8:27 ` kloedej at knmi dot nl
2006-03-13 4:22 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-13 4:35 ` patchapp at dberlin dot org
2006-03-13 4:36 ` [Bug fortran/26509] incorrect behaviour of error-handler for direct access write jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-18 1:56 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-18 2:00 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-23 6:07 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-23 6:09 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2006-03-23 6:18 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060309071235.6761.qmail@sourceware.org \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).