[Bug fortran/38439] I/O PD edit descriptor inconsistency

["burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org  2009-01-22 10:53 -------
> Thus:  '(1pD24.15)'  is valid
Fully agreed - that version is valid and accepted with gfortran, ifort, NAG f95
etc.

> While: '(1pD24.15e4)'  is invalid

It is, but as written sunf95/openf95/gfortran 4.1 accept it at compile time and
gfortran 4.x and g95 accept it at run time and it generates the different size
of the exponent ("D+0" for pD24.15e1 and "D+00000" for pD24.15e5). Still, there
is the question whether one wants to allow it (at compile time) with some
options, reject it at run-time, or keep the status quo.

 * * *

The other question is: Why is the location marker ("1") in the error message
(see comment 2) way off? If one tries something else, the location fits much
better, e.g.
      WRITE (*,'(g0.3.4)') 1.0d0
                     1

Another error question is:  '(1pd0.3)'
ifort, g95, and NAG f95 claim: "Error: Zero field width invalid for D edit
descriptor"; gfortran accepts it but prints "*****" while openf95 accepts it an
prints "1.0E+000". I think gfortran should compile-time-diagnose it. (When
passing it as string, ifort and g95 print "1.000D+00" and f95 prints ""; I
think printing '******' is also ok.)


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38439