This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug fortran/61933] Inquire on internal units
- From: "jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 15:07:26 +0000
- Subject: [Bug fortran/61933] Inquire on internal units
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-61933-4 at http dot gcc dot gnu dot org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61933
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
You might notice that we redefined existence to be whether or not it is
connected. Units get connected when opened so your sample code needs only ask:
IF ((.NOT.is_open).AND.(istat == 0)) RETURN
Whether this is what we really want to do of course is open to discussion.
The other definition for existence is .true. for all units except -1 which is
moot because -1 will give an error and the test for existence is always .true.
and not needed. Also unit existence is processor dependent.
In your opinion, should we change it to the other definition? Unit existence
is sort of a nebulous situation. Will your code be more portable without the
test for existence?