[Bug libfortran/47830] New: errors in intrinsics/c99_functions.c

[Bug libfortran/47830] New: errors in intrinsics/c99_functions.c

[kuehro at gmx dot de]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47830

           Summary: errors in intrinsics/c99_functions.c
           Product: gcc
           Version: unknown
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: libfortran
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: kuehro@gmx.de


Since 2007-08 roundl() has a version for systems that lack ceill but
have nextafterl. This is the case on NetBSD know. There are two
errors making it non-compileable. Line numbers are different
depending on gcc version, so please change

      static long double prechalf = nexafterl (0.5L, LDBL_MAX);

to

      long double prechalf = nextafterl (0.5L, LDBL_MAX);


This is the orginal code in the latest snapshot:

#else

/* Poor version of roundl for system that don't have ceill.  */
long double
roundl (long double x)
{
  if (x > DBL_MAX || x < -DBL_MAX)
    {
#ifdef HAVE_NEXTAFTERL
      static long double prechalf = nexafterl (0.5L, LDBL_MAX);
#else
      static long double prechalf = 0.5L;
#endif
      return (GFC_INTEGER_LARGEST) (x + (x > 0 ? prechalf : -prechalf));
    }
  else
    /* Use round().  */
    return round ((double) x);
}

#endif
#endif

[Bug libfortran/47830] errors in intrinsics/c99_functions.c

[burnus at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47830

Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |build
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2011.02.21 09:37:55
                 CC|                            |burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
      Known to fail|                            |4.3.5, 4.4.5, 4.5.2, 4.6.0

--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-21 09:37:55 UTC ---
Confirmed. In Fortran 2003 such a code would be valid ...

(In reply to comment #0)
> There are two errors

For those having - like me - problems to spot the second error:

>       static long double prechalf = nexafterl (0.5L, LDBL_MAX);
>              long double prechalf = nextafterl (0.5L, LDBL_MAX);

[Bug libfortran/47830] errors in intrinsics/c99_functions.c

[kuehro at gmx dot de]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47830

--- Comment #2 from Kai-Uwe Eckhardt <kuehro at gmx dot de> 2011-02-21 10:38:16 UTC ---
Hi,

> > There are two errors
> 
> For those having - like me - problems to spot the second error:
> 
> >       static long double prechalf = nexafterl (0.5L, LDBL_MAX);
> >              long double prechalf = nextafterl (0.5L, LDBL_MAX);

well besides the typo nexfaterl declaring a variable static in
block scope is evaluated as a const qualifier which cannot be
assigned using a function. At least the default compiler on
NetBSD gcc-4.1.3 tells me so. I tried to look it up in the C99
standard, if this is a compiler error or not. Mabey it would be cleaner
to put the declaration at the beginning of the function roundl.

Kai-Uwe Eckhardt

[Bug libfortran/47830] errors in intrinsics/c99_functions.c

[burnus at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47830

--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-21 11:19:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> well besides the typo nexfaterl

Well, that was actually the problem I had - my brain magically added the "t"
;-)

(For NetBSD there is also PR 39570, which is about cabsf warnings.)

[Bug libfortran/47830] errors in intrinsics/c99_functions.c

[burnus at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47830

--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-22 12:37:16 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Tue Feb 22 12:37:12 2011
New Revision: 170396

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170396
Log:
2011-02-22  Tobias Burnus  <burnus@net-b.de>
            Kai-Uwe Eckhardt  <kuehro@gmx.de>

        PR libfortran/47830
        * intrinsics/c99_functions.c (roundl): Make C valid for
        HAVE_NEXTAFTERL.


Modified:
    trunk/libgfortran/ChangeLog
    trunk/libgfortran/intrinsics/c99_functions.c

[Bug libfortran/47830] errors in intrinsics/c99_functions.c

[burnus at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47830

--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-22 12:41:57 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Tue Feb 22 12:41:54 2011
New Revision: 170397

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170397
Log:
2011-02-22  Tobias Burnus  <burnus@net-b.de>
            Kai-Uwe Eckhardt  <kuehro@gmx.de>

        PR libfortran/47830
        * intrinsics/c99_functions.c (roundl): Make C valid for
        HAVE_NEXTAFTERL.


Modified:
    branches/gcc-4_5-branch/libgfortran/ChangeLog
    branches/gcc-4_5-branch/libgfortran/intrinsics/c99_functions.c

[Bug libfortran/47830] errors in intrinsics/c99_functions.c

[burnus at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47830

--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-22 12:43:42 UTC ---
Author: burnus
Date: Tue Feb 22 12:43:38 2011
New Revision: 170398

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=170398
Log:
2011-02-22  Tobias Burnus  <burnus@net-b.de>
            Kai-Uwe Eckhardt  <kuehro@gmx.de>

        PR libfortran/47830
        * intrinsics/c99_functions.c (roundl): Make C valid for
        HAVE_NEXTAFTERL.


Modified:
    branches/gcc-4_4-branch/libgfortran/ChangeLog
    branches/gcc-4_4-branch/libgfortran/intrinsics/c99_functions.c

[Bug libfortran/47830] errors in intrinsics/c99_functions.c

[burnus at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47830

Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-22 12:44:20 UTC ---
FIXED on the trunk (4.6) and on the 4.4 and 4.5 branches.

Thanks for the report!