This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [patch,fortran] Fix PR19310 unnecessary error for overflowing results


On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 10:41:50PM -0700, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
> :REVIEWMAIL:
> 
> 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 
> earlier.
> 
> If no further comments is this OK to commit?
> 
> Regards,
> 

Jerry,

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.

-- 
Steve


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]