This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug fortran/38823] Diagnose and treat (-2.0)**2.0 properly
- From: "dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 13 Jan 2009 21:13:57 -0000
- Subject: [Bug fortran/38823] Diagnose and treat (-2.0)**2.0 properly
- References: <bug-38823-13404@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #10 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-01-13 21:13 -------
> I intend to change this, conditional on perhaps -ffast-math and/or -pedantic,
I don't understand the "and/or": -ffast-math and -pedantic at the same time
does not make any sense for me, -ffast-math allows some sloppiness with respect
to the standard, while -pedantic does not.
> You can use A**I directly if you want to accept negative values.
I have never said that (-2.0)**2.0 is in my coding style. My point is that a
pedantic implementation triggers too many bug reports and are not worth the
time spent on it (see -2**31).
I agree with comment#0 "gfortran should print a diagnostic for
-std=f95/f2003/f2008", but not without -std=*.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38823