This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [gfortran] patch for unformatted sequential writes
- From: Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Bud Davis <bdavis at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gfortran <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Arnaud Desitter <arnaud dot desitter at ouce dot ox dot ac dot uk>, Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>, Toon Moene <toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:36:29 -0700
- Subject: Re: [gfortran] patch for unformatted sequential writes
- References: <1087527449.2921.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <87llilcye0.fsf@taltos.codesourcery.com>
On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 08:56:23PM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Bud Davis <bdavis@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
>
> > Here is an implementation that should make most people happy. It adds a
> > new run-time environment variable, called
> >
> > GFORTRAN_SEQUENTIAL_IO_RECORD_SIZE_MAX_BITS
> >
> > it can be set to either 32 or 64. the default is the size of off_t,
> > which was the previous default for gfortran.
>
> Oh ick. This is what they call a "please unbreak my program" toggle.
> Why can't you use a variable-length encoding for the record size
> (several such were posted the last time this came up) so that
> everything just works?
>
Do you have pointers to the previous posts? Bud is
probably concerned with backwards compatibility with
g77 and the future of 64-bit computing (amd64, ia64,
etc) where 2 GB record lengths are prohibitive.
--
Steve