This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch,fortran] Fix PR19310 unnecessary error for overflowing results
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 10:41:50PM -0700, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
> The attached patch expands considerably on the last one.
> I think I have covered all possibilities in the correct order.
> This is a request for further comment.
> It occurred to me that in simplify.c there are many functions with their
> own error checking independent of range_check. Do we want to incorporate
> the -frange_check flag into these error checks?
> Also I noticed that IFORT does not do all this checking by default and
> happily compiles a lot of stuff. We could default this the other way. Any
> thoughts on that? (not that intel is the only way to do this)
> Regardless, the patch regtests OK, including the test case I submitted
> If no further comments is this OK to commit?
I read the patch and I think it's almost ready to commit.
However, I want to study the part in arith.c where it looks
likes you disable the gradual underflow via SUBNORMAL, and
I want to check the logic the with complex types. In a quick
read, it looks like you skip the imaginary part depending on
the checking of the real part.