[Bug fortran/57822] New: I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[Bug fortran/57822] New: I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[burnus at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

            Bug ID: 57822
           Summary: I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.9.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: wrong-code
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: fortran
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org

g0 should print the minimal output. However, gfortran shows the exponent
("E+0000") for REAL(10) and REAL(16):

.100000001
.10000000000000001
.100000000000000000001E+0000
.100000000000000000000000000000000005E+0000

Test case:

print '(g0)', 0.1_4
print '(g0)', 0.1_8
print '(g0)', 0.1_10
print '(g0)', 0.1_16
end

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

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

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2013-09-03
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Feb 10 02:49:58 2015
New Revision: 220564

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220564&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-09  Jerry DeLisle  <jvdelisle@gcc.gnu.org>

    PR libgfortran/57822
    * io/write_float.def (output_float): If doing g0 editing and
    exponent is zero, do not emit exponent.

Modified:
    trunk/libgfortran/ChangeLog
    trunk/libgfortran/io/write_float.def

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Feb 10 03:34:19 2015
New Revision: 220565

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220565&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-10  Jerry DeLisle  <jvdelisle@gcc.gnu.org>

    PR libgfortran/57822
    * gfortran/fmt_g0_7.f08: New test.

Added:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_7.f08
Modified:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> Author: jvdelisle
> Date: Tue Feb 10 03:34:19 2015
> New Revision: 220565
>
> URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220565&root=gcc&view=rev
> Log:
> 2015-02-10  Jerry DeLisle  <jvdelisle@gcc.gnu.org>
>
> 	PR libgfortran/57822
> 	* gfortran/fmt_g0_7.f08: New test.
>
> Added:
>     trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_7.f08
> Modified:
>     trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog

I am afraid that the test will fail on targets without REAL(10).
>From gcc-bugs-return-476582-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Feb 10 04:36:04 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-476582-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 27216 invoked by alias); 10 Feb 2015 04:36:04 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 27169 invoked by uid 48); 10 Feb 2015 04:36:01 -0000
From: "dominiq at lps dot ens.fr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/59765] [4.9/5 Regression] [OOP] ICE on valid with finalizable array components
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 04:36:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pault at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.9.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-59765-4-XrvlUa92vh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-59765-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-59765-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-02/txt/msg00915.txt.bz2
Content-length: 175

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idY765

--- Comment #17 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> Is this fix committed to the trunk?

Not yet.

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #4)
> > Author: jvdelisle
> > Date: Tue Feb 10 03:34:19 2015
> > New Revision: 220565
> >
> > URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220565&root=gcc&view=rev
> > Log:
> > 2015-02-10  Jerry DeLisle  <jvdelisle@gcc.gnu.org>
> >
> > 	PR libgfortran/57822
> > 	* gfortran/fmt_g0_7.f08: New test.
> >
> > Added:
> >     trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_7.f08
> > Modified:
> >     trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
> 
> I am afraid that the test will fail on targets without REAL(10).

Good point, same with real 16 if libquadmath is not enabled.  I could set it
for a specific archtecture that will work or do an expect to fail as they show
up.
>From gcc-bugs-return-476584-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Tue Feb 10 06:11:13 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-476584-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 26557 invoked by alias); 10 Feb 2015 06:11:13 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 26527 invoked by uid 48); 10 Feb 2015 06:11:09 -0000
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/60180] internal compiler error: in use_thunk, at cp/method.c:338
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 06:11:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.8.2
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-60180-4-1ypqsnbTjy@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-60180-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-60180-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-02/txt/msg00917.txt.bz2
Content-length: 607

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id`180

Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |WAITING
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2015-02-10
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Works for me with:
gcc version 5.0.0 20150104 (experimental) [trunk revision 219170] (GCC)


Can you try a later compiler like 4.9?

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

--- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
Something such as

! { dg-do run }
! PR58722
program testit
use ISO_FORTRAN_ENV
  implicit none
  integer, parameter :: j(size(real_kinds)+4)=[REAL_KINDS, [4, 4, 4, 4]]
  character(50) :: astring
  integer :: i, l, n

  n = 0
  do i=1,size(real_kinds)
    if (i == 1) then
      write(astring, '(g0)') 1.0/real(10.0, kind=j(1))
    else if (i == 2) then
      write(astring, '(g0)') 1.0/real(10.0, kind=j(2))
    else if (i == 3) then
      write(astring, '(g0)') 1.0/real(10.0, kind=j(3))
    else if (i == 4) then
      write(astring, '(g0)') 1.0/real(10.0, kind=j(4))
    end if
    l = index(astring, 'E')
    if (l /= 0) then
      print *, i, l, trim(astring)
      n = n + l
    end if
  end do
  if (n /= 0) call abort

end program

should do the trick.

Note that the output of this test on powerpc-apple-darwin9 r220529 is

           3          38 .999999999999999999999999999999996919E-0001

so it seems that the test will fail on powerpc* using the "IBM" REAL(16).

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6)
> 
> Note that the output of this test on powerpc-apple-darwin9 r220529 is
> 
>            3          38 .999999999999999999999999999999996919E-0001
> 
> so it seems that the test will fail on powerpc* using the "IBM" REAL(16).

Can you try a round up on that to see what it does?

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Feb 11 04:29:06 2015
New Revision: 220606

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220606&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-10 Jerry DeLisle  <jvdelisle@gcc.gnu.org>

    PR libgfortran/57822
    * io/write_float.def (output_float): Apply fix of previous patch
    to correctly calculate the exponent number of digits and take
    care of wide character output.

Modified:
    trunk/libgfortran/ChangeLog
    trunk/libgfortran/io/write_float.def

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> I am afraid that the test will fail on targets without REAL(10).

see https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00698.html and e.g.,
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-02/msg01269.html.

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #9)
> > I am afraid that the test will fail on targets without REAL(10).
> 
> see https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-02/msg00698.html and e.g.,
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2015-02/msg01269.html.

Yes, I am aware of the failures and have been testing your version of the test
case.  I am just squeezing in time when I can.  Should have the new test case
ready to go in this evening. I have a way to bypass the:

3          38 .999999999999999999999999999999996919E-0001

problem in Comment #7.  Then we look for any other architectures that fail.

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

--- Comment #11 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Thu Feb 12 03:52:45 2015
New Revision: 220637

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220637&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-11  Jerry DeLisle  <jvdelisle@gcc.gnu.org>

    PR libgfortran/57822
    * gfortran/fmt_g0_7.f08: Revise test.

Modified:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_7.f08

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

--- Comment #12 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Feb 13 02:57:03 2015
New Revision: 220673

URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=220673&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2015-02-12  Jerry DeLisle  <jvdelisle@gcc.gnu.org>

    PR libgfortran/57822
    * gfortran/fmt_g0_7.f08: Adjust for archtectures with less than
    four different KINDs.

Modified:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/fmt_g0_7.f08

[Bug fortran/57822] I/O: "(g0)" wrongly prints "E+0000"

[jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57822

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

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

--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
No further issues. Closing