Hi,
Tilo Schwarz wrote:
this patch fixes PR 48618.
Built and regtested on Linux 3.2.0-4-686-pae.
Thanks for the patch, which mostly looks okay.
A few remarks:
* Do not create a diff of the ChangeLog but include it separately at the
top of the patch. Reason: It's easier to read and if another patch has
been applied before, your patch won't apply.
* A ChangeLog for the testcase is missing.
* Coding style: If 8 spaces have accumulated, replace them by one tab, i.e.
- u = find_or_create_unit (opp->common.unit);
+ if (u == NULL)
+ u = find_or_create_unit (opp->common.unit);
Here, the last line should use a "tab". (The other important rule is to
have maximally 80 character per source line.)
See also http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/FormattingCodeForGCC
(Consistent coding styles makes it easier to read the code. The style
might not always the best or to the personal taste, but still
consistency helps. For instance, function names always start in column 1
and have a " " before the "(". Hence, one can do "grep '^funcname ' *.c
to find the function.)
* Comment style:
+ if (u == NULL) /* negative unit and no unit found */
+ generate_error (&opp->common, LIBERROR_BAD_OPTION,
+ "Bad unit number in OPEN statement");
+ /* check for previous error, otherwise unit won't be unlocked
later */
To quote the comment style from
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Comments.html:
"Please put two spaces after the end of a sentence in your comments, so
that the Emacs sentence commands will work. Also, please write complete
sentences and capitalize the first word. If a lower-case identifier
comes at the beginning of a sentence, don’t capitalize it! Changing the
spelling makes it a different identifier. If you don’t like starting a
sentence with a lower case letter, write the sentence differently (e.g.,
“The identifier lower-case is …”)."
(The existing code does not always follow the style, but one should at
least try, even if there is some leeway ;-)
* Regarding your patch itself. I think it is easier to read if one moves
the code a bit further down as I did in the attachment. What do you think?
* Copyright assignment: You mentioned that you have emailed(§) the form
back to the FSF. Was this the actual copyright-assignment form which the
FSF sent to you by mail? Or was it 'only' request form? Can you tell us,
when the FSF has acknowledged the arrival of the copyright assignment?
Tobias
(§) Side note: The FSF now also allows to send the copyright form back
by FAX or (scanned) by email, but only if you are residing in the USA or
in Germany. Residents of other countries still have to return it by
(air,surface) mail. Cf.
http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Copyright-Papers.html
diff --git a/libgfortran/io/open.c b/libgfortran/io/open.c
index d9cfde8..19fab1d 100644
--- a/libgfortran/io/open.c
+++ b/libgfortran/io/open.c
@@ -817,12 +817,8 @@ st_open (st_parameter_open *opp)
}
flags.convert = conv;
- if (!(opp->common.flags & IOPARM_OPEN_HAS_NEWUNIT) && opp->common.unit < 0)
- generate_error (&opp->common, LIBERROR_BAD_OPTION,
- "Bad unit number in OPEN statement");
-
if (flags.position != POSITION_UNSPECIFIED
&& flags.access == ACCESS_DIRECT)
generate_error (&opp->common, LIBERROR_BAD_OPTION,
"Cannot use POSITION with direct access files");
@@ -847,10 +843,18 @@ st_open (st_parameter_open *opp)
if ((opp->common.flags & IOPARM_LIBRETURN_MASK) == IOPARM_LIBRETURN_OK)
{
if ((opp->common.flags & IOPARM_OPEN_HAS_NEWUNIT))
opp->common.unit = get_unique_unit_number(opp);
+ else if (opp->common.unit < 0)
+ {
+ u = find_unit (opp->common.unit);
+ if (u == NULL) /* Negative unit and no NEWUNIT-created unit found. */
+ generate_error (&opp->common, LIBERROR_BAD_OPTION,
+ "Bad unit number in OPEN statement");
+ }
- u = find_or_create_unit (opp->common.unit);
+ if (u == NULL)
+ u = find_or_create_unit (opp->common.unit);
if (u->s == NULL)
{
u = new_unit (opp, u, &flags);
if (u != NULL)
