This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: [Fortran, patch] PR33001 - Point to -fno-range-check
- From: "Dave Korn" <dave dot korn at artimi dot com>
- To: "'FX Coudert'" <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>, "'Tobias Burnus'" <burnus at net-b dot de>
- Cc: <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "'gcc-patches'" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 22:30:55 +0100
- Subject: RE: [Fortran, patch] PR33001 - Point to -fno-range-check
- References: <46B7657F.2070204@net-b.de> <D620FA1F-4BF2-4298-9978-52BA0EF5F2D6@gmail.com>
On 09 August 2007 22:15, FX Coudert wrote:
>> REVIEWMAIL:
>
>> Index: gcc/fortran/arith.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- gcc/fortran/arith.c (Revision 127246)
>> +++ gcc/fortran/arith.c (Arbeitskopie)
>> @@ -1981,7 +1981,8 @@ arith_error (arith rc, gfc_typespec *fro
>> gfc_typename (from), gfc_typename (to), where);
>> break; case ARITH_OVERFLOW:
>> - gfc_error ("Arithmetic overflow converting %s to %s at %L",
>> + gfc_error ("Arithmetic overflow converting %s to %s at %L. This
>> check " + "can be disabled with the option
>> -fno-range-check", gfc_typename (from), gfc_typename
>> (to), where); break; case ARITH_UNDERFLOW:
>
> OK, noone seems to have any objection and I find it nice.
>
> FX
Dunno if you guys are interested in a random suggestion but it might be even
nicer if the second sentence was only printed the first time per run.
cheers,
DaveK
--
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....