This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug fortran/14957] [gfortran] testsuite issues
- From: "jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 14 Apr 2004 18:49:26 -0000
- Subject: [Bug fortran/14957] [gfortran] testsuite issues
- References: <20040414171503.14957.jv244@cam.ac.uk>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2004-04-14 18:49 -------
> I think IFC is wrong here (please someone check with another fortran
compiler).
FYI, all checked against NAG f95
> intrinsic_minmax.f90:
> It is complaining about " if (max (4d0, r) .ne. 4d0) call abort" but this
might have changed for
> fortran2003.
no:
Arguments. The arguments shall all have the same type which shall be integer,
real, or character and they shall all have the same kind type parameter.
> cmplx.f90:
> maybe added to fortran2003 (or is it 2004).
2003 (and no).
> st_function.f90:
> "The statement function is obsolescent in Fortran 95"
That's just a warning. The construct on line 32 is an error with NAG. But, I'm
not an expert here.
> intrinsic_index.f90:
> I get the warnings or errors with IFC.
> intrinsic_trim.f90:
> "
> program INTRINSIC_TRIM
> b=trim(a)
> ^
> Warning 141 at (9:pr14957.6.f90) : Character string truncated to length 4 on
assignment
> external function WORK
> "
The real problem is
b=work(9,a) (a is of length 8, not 9). Similar in the above. "FORTRAN" is 7
not 8 charachters.
> Since I do not know fortran 77/90/95/2003 that well but remember IFC is not
the compiler that all that
> ends all.
No, IFC is rather poor ;)
Thanks for your quick reply! A bug master worthy
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14957