[Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran

public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed

* [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran
       [not found] <bug-37355-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2014-03-23  0:35 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
  2015-08-26 14:58 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2014-03-23  0:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37355

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |NEW

--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
Does not seem assigned.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran
       [not found] <bug-37355-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
  2014-03-23  0:35 ` [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
@ 2015-08-26 14:58 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
  2015-08-30 21:48 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
  2015-08-31  2:41 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-08-26 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37355

Francois-Xavier Coudert <fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |WAITING
                 CC|                            |fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #7 from Francois-Xavier Coudert <fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This is a feature which:

 - there is a standard way to achieve, using FLUSH in the right places
 - there is a non-standard way to achieve, with environment variables
(GFORTRAN_*_UNBUFFERED)

Do we need yet another extension? I don't think so.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran
       [not found] <bug-37355-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
  2014-03-23  0:35 ` [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
  2015-08-26 14:58 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-08-30 21:48 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
  2015-08-31  2:41 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2015-08-30 21:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37355

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> Do we need yet another extension? I don't think so.

Agreed.

Jerry,

Do you still want to assign this PR to yourself?


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran
       [not found] <bug-37355-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2015-08-30 21:48 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
@ 2015-08-31  2:41 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-08-31  2:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37355

Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |WONTFIX

--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
No, lets close it.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* [Bug fortran/37355]  New: Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran
@ 2008-09-03 17:04 MMcVeigh at att dot net
  2008-09-03 18:07 ` [Bug fortran/37355] " kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (5 more replies)
  0 siblings, 6 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: MMcVeigh at att dot net @ 2008-09-03 17:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

When FORTRAN code is combined with C, there can be instances of
non-chronological output for STDOUT and STDERR.  Setting the environment
variable GFORTRAN_PRECONNECTED_UNBUFFERED is effective, but is not helpful for
uncontrolled customer shell environments.  I would like a method to override
the default buffering at runtime.  One method is to provide a libfortran
globally accessible function to change the libfortran.h values of

_gfortrani_options.all_unbuffered = 1 and
_gfortrani_options.unbuffered_preconnected = 1

Thank You,
Mark McVeigh

-- 
           Summary: Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.3.2
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: fortran
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: MMcVeigh at att dot net

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37355

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran
  2008-09-03 17:04 [Bug fortran/37355] New: " MMcVeigh at att dot net
@ 2008-09-03 18:07 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2008-09-08 18:31 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (4 subsequent siblings)
  5 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-09-03 18:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



-- 

kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|normal                      |enhancement
           Priority|P3                          |P5


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37355


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran
  2008-09-03 17:04 [Bug fortran/37355] New: " MMcVeigh at att dot net
  2008-09-03 18:07 ` [Bug fortran/37355] " kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-09-08 18:31 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2008-09-08 20:01 ` MMcVeigh at att dot net
                   ` (3 subsequent siblings)
  5 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-09-08 18:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #1 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-09-08 18:29 -------
(In reply to comment #0)
I would like a method to override
> the default buffering at runtime.

What about calling FLUSH in critical places?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37355


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran
  2008-09-03 17:04 [Bug fortran/37355] New: " MMcVeigh at att dot net
  2008-09-03 18:07 ` [Bug fortran/37355] " kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2008-09-08 18:31 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-09-08 20:01 ` MMcVeigh at att dot net
  2008-09-11 19:31 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  5 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: MMcVeigh at att dot net @ 2008-09-08 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs

------- Comment #2 from MMcVeigh at att dot net  2008-09-08 20:00 -------
Yes, FLUSH works, but 

* I don't think it was part of standards until 2003, 
* I need to place it several places in my code,
* I really didn't want gfortran specific code if I could avoid it
* There isn't a problem with buffering on our other compilers
  on HP-UX.  c89 + HP F90 work fine for buffer synchronization.

I guess I will have to assume my feature request is denied.

Thanks for your suggestion,

Mark

-- 

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37355

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran
  2008-09-03 17:04 [Bug fortran/37355] New: " MMcVeigh at att dot net
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2008-09-08 20:01 ` MMcVeigh at att dot net
@ 2008-09-11 19:31 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-04-13  4:10 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-04-13  5:40 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
  5 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-09-11 19:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #3 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-09-11 19:30 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> Yes, FLUSH works, but 
> 
> * I don't think it was part of standards until 2003, 
> * I need to place it several places in my code,
> * I really didn't want gfortran specific code if I could avoid it
> * There isn't a problem with buffering on our other compilers
>   on HP-UX.  c89 + HP F90 work fine for buffer synchronization.
> 
> I guess I will have to assume my feature request is denied.

Actually, it's not :-)

Confirmed.  I'll think about this a little bit.


-- 

tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2008-09-11 19:30:14
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37355


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran
  2008-09-03 17:04 [Bug fortran/37355] New: " MMcVeigh at att dot net
                   ` (3 preceding siblings ...)
  2008-09-11 19:31 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-13  4:10 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
  2010-04-13  5:40 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
  5 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-13  4:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-04-13 04:10 -------
Looking at latest gfortran, we have raw_init and buf_init functions which set
the style of I/O.  I think it would be relatively easy now to create a Gnu
extension as an intrinsic procedure call that will force a flush on a unit and
then call raw_init or buf_init based on some parameter passed to the procedure.
 We would have to make sure the unit has the lock when doing this. We also have
to make sure we have no pending asynchronous I/O happening.  In other words, we
force a WAIT as well.

I will assign myself to this as a reminder.  I may not get to it, so if someone
else wishes to do so, take it.


-- 

jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |dot org                     |org
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|2008-09-11 19:30:14         |2010-04-13 04:10:43
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37355


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

* [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran
  2008-09-03 17:04 [Bug fortran/37355] New: " MMcVeigh at att dot net
                   ` (4 preceding siblings ...)
  2010-04-13  4:10 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2010-04-13  5:40 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
  5 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2010-04-13  5:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: gcc-bugs



------- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-04-13 05:40 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> Looking at latest gfortran, we have raw_init and buf_init functions which set
> the style of I/O.  I think it would be relatively easy now to create a Gnu
> extension as an intrinsic procedure call that will force a flush on a unit

The question is whether it needs to be some easily accessible intrinsic
function or whether some __gfortran_set_* would be enough; cf.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/Non_002dFortran-Main-Program.html

The latter, which just sets a variable would be also an option. Actually, one
could think of adding an item to _gfortran_set_options


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37355


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2015-08-31  2:41 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <bug-37355-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2014-03-23  0:35 ` [Bug fortran/37355] Request runtime preconnected buffer option for gfortran dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2015-08-26 14:58 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-08-30 21:48 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2015-08-31  2:41 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
2008-09-03 17:04 [Bug fortran/37355] New: " MMcVeigh at att dot net
2008-09-03 18:07 ` [Bug fortran/37355] " kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-09-08 18:31 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-09-08 20:01 ` MMcVeigh at att dot net
2008-09-11 19:31 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-13  4:10 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
2010-04-13  5:40 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org

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).