Re: [simplify.c] bug?

[Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>]

On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 08:51:09AM -0700, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
> Steve Kargl wrote:
> >If you implement atanh in a similar fashion as besj0 or erfc,
> >there is no simplification routine.  Simplification does more
> >than just constant folding.  Are you implementing atanh to take
> >an array argument and return an array of results?
> >
> Yes, I am following besj0.  I was exploring checking for range limits 
> with atanh when I stumbled on the odd behavior.  I used asin as an 
> example for the list because the other is still cooking.
> 

AFAICT, the simplification functions are working as designed.
It appears the error message is not properly propagated back
through the call chain.

Okay, I know wants going on (sort of).

Consider the three programs

program asin_specific
   real(4) x
   x = asin(1.1)
end program asin_specific

program dasin_specific
   real(8) x
   x = dasin(1.1_8)
end program dasin_specific

program asin_generic
   real(8) x
   x = asin(1.1_8)
end program asin_generic

The first 2 program yield errors from the simplification 
because this portion


  if (expr->value.function.isym != NULL)
    return (do_simplify (expr->value.function.isym, expr) == FAILURE)
      ? MATCH_ERROR : MATCH_YES;

of gfc_intrinsic_func_interface() in intrinsic.c is executed.

For the case of a generic function, expr->value.function.isym == NULL
and by pass this chunk.  I need to check the rest of 
gfc_intrinsic_func_interface() to see how failures with generics are
handled.


-- 
Steve