[Bug fortran/98577] Wrong "count_rate" values with int32 and real32 if the "count" argument is int64.

["sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98577

--- Comment #19 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> ---
On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 06:43:20PM +0000, mehdi.chinoune at hotmail dot com
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98577
> 
> --- Comment #17 from Chinoune <mehdi.chinoune at hotmail dot com> ---
> Once I reported a bug to gcc/gfortran
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91337 but someone argued that it
> was my fault to use "-Ofast" so I rewrite the reproducer in C and reported
> again under another category
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91734. the bug was confirmed and
> fixed without someone blaming me for that.

Fortran and C are different languages.  I standby my
assessment.  Options that cause the compiler to knowingly
violate the Fortran Standard and cause unexpected behavior
do not justify a bug.

> Another when I reported another bug but that "someone" said that my reproducer
> is invalid, fortunately some other guys didn't take his opinion under
> consideration and they fixed the bug.
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92736

Well, I actually I never stated the code was invalid.

In comment #1, I said I "Not sure the code is conforming,
and don't have time to investigate (unless someone is
willing to cough up $$)."  Also, suggested two workarounds
that would get you passed the issue.

In comment #2, you stated "You introduced a regression
and it is your duty to fix it."

In comment #3, I clearly stated "When it comes to gfortran,
I have no duty to you or anyone else.  I have neither the
time nor now the inclination to look at this bug (unless
someone coughs up $$$$ (price just went up ;))."

At this point, I stopped looking at the bug because I
have a real job that pays me $ to feed my family, and
I found the tone of your comment #3 to b rude.  

So, in summary you once again are bending what is written
to your reality.

> The problem is that "someone" still there (fortran category)
> attacking anyone who dare to report a bug in gfortran.

You are not being attacked.  You are being educated on
what processor-dependent behavior means, and you have been
told that the gfortran documentation tells you what the
processor-dependent behavior is.  If you refuse to learn,
neither I nor anyone else can help you.