[Fwd: Re: [Bug libfortran/19303] Unformatted record header is 4-bytes on 32-bit targets]
Emil Block
blime@cox.net
Tue May 31 22:57:00 GMT 2005
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Bug libfortran/19303] Unformatted record header is
4-bytes on 32-bit targets
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 10:03:54 -0400
From: Emil Block <blime@cox.net>
To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
References: <20050106232657.19303.milan@cmm.ki.si>
<20050531084141.1497.qmail@sourceware.org>
I second the "thanks a million", and also don't think g77 belongs in
the option name.
I have been using a very fast sort program for large files written in
C++ (not by me) , and compiled with gcc-3.3.2 (c++) which produces a
binary file that is read using Fortran code compiled with g77, and have
not experienced any problems. I was testing this very large simulation
using gcc-4.0 (c++) and g95 when I ran into the problem -- the binary
file created
with gcc-4.0 (c++) could not be read by g95 compiled code --
incompatible record markers
(32 bit vice 64 bit).
blime
milan at cmm dot ki dot si wrote:
>------- Additional Comments From milan at cmm dot ki dot si 2005-05-31 08:41 -------
>Great work! Thanks a million!
>
>Somehow I also have a problem with the name of the option, since g77 has exactly
>the same problem. When I compile with the g77 I get 8 byte headers on AMD64, so
>the name g77 doesn't really correspond to always get 4 byte headers. But this is
>very minor thing especially if it is documented how it works, the name shouldn't
>really matter.
>
>
>
More information about the Fortran
mailing list