public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "anlauf at gmx dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libfortran/63930] libgfortran should use 'abort ()' instead of 'exit (2)' for run-time errors Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2015 18:52:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-63930-4-DoxYa3PaLh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-63930-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63930 Harald Anlauf <anlauf at gmx dot de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |anlauf at gmx dot de --- Comment #2 from Harald Anlauf <anlauf at gmx dot de> --- I think that there is a fundamental need to rewrite the handling of runtime errors in gfortran. Since 4.7 I do often not get useful backtraces with certain kinds of fatal errors like array-bounds violation, see PR/53739. I use the patch I suggested there in my private installations, but this doesn't help my colleagues at work. I think a fatal runtime error does not require a nice termination of the program, including closing of files etc. However, this might require a general review - and classification - of runtime errors: - fatal (illegal operations like bad pointers/addresses etc.) - severe (e.g. failed ALLOCATE?) - soft (e.g. "file not found" in an OPEN statement) I'm not sure where I'd place floating point exceptions; their severity might even be configurable. (Note: I'm writing this as nobody seems to care about PR/53739).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-05 18:52 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2014-11-18 10:37 [Bug libfortran/63930] New: " ludo at gnu dot org 2015-07-05 12:41 ` [Bug libfortran/63930] " fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-07-05 18:52 ` anlauf at gmx dot de [this message] 2015-07-05 18:53 ` anlauf at gmx dot de 2015-07-05 20:01 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-09-04 22:09 ` fxcoudert 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-63930-4-DoxYa3PaLh@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).