From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14261 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2010 21:07:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 14178 invoked by uid 48); 29 Jul 2010 21:07:04 -0000 Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 21:07:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100729210704.14177.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/45129] I/O edit descriptors: Warn if the format field is too small for the E and F edit descriptor In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "burnus 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: 2010-07/txt/msg03258.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-29 21:07 ------- For completeness, the current patch has failures for for following test cases. In particular: - Reading - here, the d == 0 does not harm (e.g. fmt_bz_bn.f). - FMT_G: Here, the the width check is wrong (e.g. transpose_reshape_r10.f90) - For writing, for 1P it might be zero, cf. fmt_zero_digits.f90 Thus, the simple check does not make much sense. Probably, one should just remove it and leave only warning part in - with a fix for Gw.d? For read, more is possible - but I think the fields are small enough that one could still warn - or should one restrict the warning to WRITE/PRINT - and not include READ/FORMAT? gfortran.dg/fmt_bz_bn.f gfortran.dg/fmt_read_bz_bn.f90 gfortran.dg/fmt_zero_digits.f90 gfortran.dg/fmt_zero_precision.f90 gfortran.dg/io_constraints_4.f90 gfortran.dg/past_eor.f90 gfortran.dg/read_infnan_1.f90 gfortran.dg/transpose_reshape_r10.f90 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45129