public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/34230] Expressions of parameters evaluated with too high precision
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:03:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071128180342.2055.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-34230-13404@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>



------- Comment #6 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-11-28 18:03 -------
I consider this a bug. I have to check, but I think that the IEEE rules are
clear, even though they are not mandatory until we introduce the corresponding
standard modules. The calculation of y does overflow, and while we can debate
on what the behaviour of -fno-range-check should be, I think there is a strong
case for doing the same thing that a) other compilers do, b) IEEE mandates, c)
is what would happen if it occurred at runtime.


-- 

fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34230


  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-11-28 18:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-11-25 21:44 [Bug fortran/34230] New: " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-26  0:12 ` [Bug fortran/34230] " kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-27 21:57 ` terry at chem dot gu dot se
2007-11-27 22:45 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-27 22:57 ` terry at chem dot gu dot se
2007-11-28  0:06 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-28 18:03 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2007-11-28 19:06 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-28 19:24 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-28 19:35 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-28 20:08 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu
2007-11-30  4:11 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-30  4:18 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-12-02 21:02 ` 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=20071128180342.2055.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).