From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25331 invoked by alias); 27 Nov 2007 21:57:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 25288 invoked by uid 48); 27 Nov 2007 21:57:41 -0000 Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 21:57:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20071127215741.25287.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/34230] Expressions of parameters evaluated with too high precision In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "terry at chem dot gu dot se" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-11/txt/msg02684.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #2 from terry at chem dot gu dot se 2007-11-27 21:57 ------- (In reply to comment #1) > There is no bug here. You have explicitly disabled > range checking. This means that you no longer have > a limitation on range in constant folding. It may > be help to look at -fdump-parse-tree. YOu don't > have an Inf until you actually do the transfer. > In that case it's a wrong code bug. With -fno-range-check you've told the compiler to produce +Infinity rather than an overflow error. Instead, it takes it upon itself to produce something other than what the source says [which is log(y), not log(some expression that may or may not be called y)]. -- terry at chem dot gu dot se changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |terry at chem dot gu dot se http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34230