From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21635 invoked by alias); 26 Nov 2009 22:07:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 21586 invoked by uid 48); 26 Nov 2009 22:07:16 -0000 Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 22:07:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20091126220716.21585.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/42131] Weird translation of DO loops In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org" 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: 2009-11/txt/msg02286.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #14 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-26 22:07 ------- (In reply to comment #13) > } > countm1.1 = (((character(kind=4)) D.1338 - (character(kind=4)) D.1337) * > (character(kind=4)) step_sign.2) / (character(kind=4)) (step_sign.2 * D.1339); > > implementing the multiplication idea outlined above, and passes at > least do_3.F90. > > Better? Looks much better than the current situation. Is there a valid reason for the character(kind=4) casts? I would have thought that this should be a integer(kind=4). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42131