public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/107874] merge not using all its arguments Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2022 21:05:43 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-107874-4-bh4fcTdSgS@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-107874-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107874 --- Comment #19 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to john.harper from comment #18) > An interesting problem! But I thought my original test case did not have > recursive I/O because tstuff and fstuff each print something in the > statement > y = merge(tstuff(),fstuff(),x(i)) > but y itself is printed only in the next statement, > print *,y John, your original testcase in comment#0 was fine. I tried to extend it to check for constant as well as non-constant mask, and as you see I made a mistake by trying to make it smaller. Bad idea. > Or does evaluating merge allow each of tstuff and fstuff to be evaluated > at the same time? I was thinking of tstuff and fstuff being evaluated > in succession but could there be systems in which they are evaluated > simultaneously? I don't recall having seen a mentioning in the standard of the order of evaluation of different function (or subroutine) arguments. Do you? (Of course, if side-effects happen during that evaluation, such as I/O, unexpected things may happen.) > If so, whether the program is valid Fortran depends on the > kind of system on which it is being executed. Well, even if the print in tstuff/fstuff were a problem, one could construct other testcases with side-effects that might be conforming.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-02 21:05 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-11-26 4:57 [Bug fortran/107874] New: " john.harper at vuw dot ac.nz 2022-11-26 20:30 ` [Bug fortran/107874] " anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-27 1:03 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-27 20:00 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-27 21:07 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-27 21:24 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu 2022-11-28 20:07 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-11-29 18:19 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-01 20:28 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-01 21:36 ` jvdelisle2 at gmail dot com 2022-12-01 21:55 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-01 22:17 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-01 23:46 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-01 23:54 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-02 0:34 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-02 17:48 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-02 19:44 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-02 20:22 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-02 20:50 ` john.harper at vuw dot ac.nz 2022-12-02 21:05 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2022-12-02 21:26 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-02 21:27 ` john.harper at vuw dot ac.nz 2022-12-02 21:35 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-02 21:42 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-12-07 21:22 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.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=bug-107874-4-bh4fcTdSgS@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --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: linkBe 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).