public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jb at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/53379] [4.7/4.8 Regression] No backtrace generated for array bounds violation Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 07:36:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-53379-4-7WPvNWWGKB@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-53379-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53379 --- Comment #2 from Janne Blomqvist <jb at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-18 06:43:08 UTC --- AFAICS, this is an intentional change in behavior. When I proposed making backtracing enabled by default, there was some objections to the initial patch on the grounds that the backtracing was too aggressive. See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-05/msg00111.html FWIW, if it is decided to change this, one could also consider changing runtime_error() and internal_error() in the same way, though one would need to audit the usage in libgfortran so that we don't generate a backtrace for a "file not found" or similar "benign" error. Or in other words, "error termination", as specified in the Fortran standard, should not lead to a backtrace. See also the comment in runtime/error.c that talks about this.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-18 7:04 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2012-05-16 17:17 [Bug fortran/53379] New: [4.7 " anlauf at gmx dot de 2012-05-16 20:30 ` [Bug fortran/53379] " anlauf at gmx dot de 2012-05-18 7:36 ` jb at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2012-05-18 7:43 ` [Bug fortran/53379] [4.7/4.8 " burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-18 14:46 ` jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-18 15:04 ` anlauf at gmx dot de 2012-05-29 14:40 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-05-31 19:41 ` anlauf at gmx dot de 2012-05-31 19:46 ` anlauf at gmx dot de 2012-05-31 19:47 ` anlauf at gmx dot de 2012-06-14 8:49 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-09-20 10:27 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-20 21:21 ` jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-11 8:00 ` [Bug fortran/53379] [4.7/4.8/4.9 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-12-29 11:55 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2014-06-12 13:45 ` [Bug fortran/53379] [4.7/4.8/4.9/4.10 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2014-12-02 11:59 ` [Bug fortran/53379] [4.8/4.9/5 " Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 2014-12-04 21:05 ` anlauf at gmx dot de 2014-12-05 8:46 ` Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 2014-12-19 13:28 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-06-23 8:22 ` [Bug fortran/53379] [4.8/4.9/5/6 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-06-26 19:58 ` [Bug fortran/53379] [4.9/5/6 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-06-26 20:29 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-08-31 16:55 ` Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 2015-08-31 21:12 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-09-04 22:04 ` jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-09-04 22:17 ` jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-09-04 22:20 ` jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-09-05 6:55 ` Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch
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-53379-4-7WPvNWWGKB@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).