[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #29 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-30 03:22 --- Subject: Bug 43265 Author: jvdelisle Date: Tue Mar 30 03:22:28 2010 New Revision: 157810 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157810 Log: 2010-03-29 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libfortran/43265 * io/transfer.c (next_record_r): Only call hit_eof for specific conditions when an EOF is encountered. Modified: trunk/libgfortran/ChangeLog trunk/libgfortran/io/transfer.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #30 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-30 03:25 --- Subject: Bug 43265 Author: jvdelisle Date: Tue Mar 30 03:25:04 2010 New Revision: 157811 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157811 Log: 2010-03-29 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libfortran/43265 * gfortran.dg/read_eof_8.f90: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/read_eof_8.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #31 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-30 03:54 --- Subject: Bug 43265 Author: jvdelisle Date: Tue Mar 30 03:54:36 2010 New Revision: 157812 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157812 Log: 2010-03-29 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libfortran/43265 * io/transfer.c (next_record_r): Only call hit_eof for specific conditions when an EOF is encountered. Modified: branches/gcc-4_4-branch/libgfortran/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_4-branch/libgfortran/io/transfer.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #32 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-30 03:56 --- Subject: Bug 43265 Author: jvdelisle Date: Tue Mar 30 03:56:08 2010 New Revision: 157813 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157813 Log: 2010-03-29 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libfortran/43265 * gfortran.dg/read_eof_8.f90: New test. Added: branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/read_eof_8.f90 Modified: branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #33 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-30 03:57 --- Closing one more time. Fixed on trunk and 4.4 -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #26 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-29 02:50 --- Reopening. I have one more regression here related to the patch sequence here. It has to do with reading a file with no EOR marker at the end of a file. program test character (len=80) :: line character (len=20) :: filename integer :: n, k=0 n = command_argument_count() if (n 0) then call get_command_argument(1,filename) else stop 'argument missing' endif open(unit=25,file=filename,status='old') do read(25,'(a80)',end=100,err=101) line k = k+1 print*,k,' : ',line(1:len_trim(line)) enddo stop ok 100 stop 100 101 stop 101 end program test I know the exact location of the problem in transfer.c (next_record_r) and am working on a patch. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #19 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-18 02:38 --- Subject: Bug 43265 Author: jvdelisle Date: Thu Mar 18 02:38:17 2010 New Revision: 157527 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157527 Log: 2010-03-17 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libfortran/43265 * io/io.h: Delete prototype for read_sf, making it static. * io/read.c (read_x): Modify to call hit_eof if PAD=no. * io/transfer.c (read_sf_internal): New static function extracted from read_sf for use on internal units only. Handle empty string case. (read_sf): New factoring of this function, make it static. Add special conditions for EOF based on ADVANCE=no, PAD=no, and whether any bytes have been previously read from the record. (read_block_form): Modify to call read_sf or read_sf_internal. (next_record_r): Add a done flag similar to next_record_w. Call hit_eof if internal array unit next record returns finished, meaning an EOF was found and not done, ie not the last record expected. For external units call hit_eof if item_count is 1 or there are no pending spaces. (next_record): Update call to next_record_r. Modified: trunk/libgfortran/ChangeLog trunk/libgfortran/io/io.h trunk/libgfortran/io/read.c trunk/libgfortran/io/transfer.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #20 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-18 02:43 --- Subject: Bug 43265 Author: jvdelisle Date: Thu Mar 18 02:43:10 2010 New Revision: 157528 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157528 Log: 2010-03-17 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libfortran/43265 *gfortran.dg/read_empty_file.f: New test. *gfortran.dg/read_eof_all.f90: New test. *gfortran.dg/namelist_27.f90: Eliminate infinite loop posibility. *gfortran.dg/namelist_28.f90: Eliminate infinite loop posibility. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/read_empty_file.f trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/read_eof_all.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/namelist_27.f90 trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/namelist_28.f90 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #21 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-18 02:52 --- The above patches take care of several other corner cases with end file conditions. Thanks Terry for report and Tobias for helping with test cases. I am not proceeding to back port to 4.4. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #22 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-18 02:54 --- Correction s/not/now -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #23 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-18 03:52 --- Subject: Bug 43265 Author: jvdelisle Date: Thu Mar 18 03:51:43 2010 New Revision: 157532 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157532 Log: 2010-03-17 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libfortran/43265 * io/io.h: Delete prototype for read_sf, making it static. * io/read.c (read_x): Modify to call hit_eof if PAD=no. * io/transfer.c (read_sf_internal): New static function extracted from read_sf for use on internal units only. Handle empty string case. (read_sf): New factoring of this function, make it static. Add special conditions for EOF based on ADVANCE=no, PAD=no, and whether any bytes have been previously read from the record. (read_block_form): Modify to call read_sf or read_sf_internal. (next_record_r): Add a done flag similar to next_record_w. Call hit_eof if internal array unit next record returns finished, meaning an EOF was found and not done, ie not the last record expected. For external units call hit_eof if item_count is 1 or there are no pending spaces. (next_record): Update call to next_record_r. Modified: branches/gcc-4_4-branch/libgfortran/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_4-branch/libgfortran/io/io.h branches/gcc-4_4-branch/libgfortran/io/read.c branches/gcc-4_4-branch/libgfortran/io/transfer.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #24 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-18 03:56 --- Subject: Bug 43265 Author: jvdelisle Date: Thu Mar 18 03:55:52 2010 New Revision: 157533 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157533 Log: 2010-03-17 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libfortran/43265 *gfortran.dg/read_empty_file.f: New test. *gfortran.dg/read_eof_all.f90: New test. *gfortran.dg/namelist_27.f90: Eliminate infinite loop posibility. *gfortran.dg/namelist_28.f90: Eliminate infinite loop posibility. Added: branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/read_empty_file.f branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/read_eof_all.f90 Modified: branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/namelist_27.f90 branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/namelist_28.f90 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #25 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-18 03:58 --- IO library is significantly changed from 4.3 to 4.4/4.5 No Backport to 4.3 Closing. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #17 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-12 14:32 --- Subject: Bug 43265 Author: jvdelisle Date: Fri Mar 12 14:32:39 2010 New Revision: 157404 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157404 Log: 2010-03-12 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libfortran/43265 Backport from trunk. * io/read.c (read_x): Replace the use of read_sf with equivalent lower level I/O, eliminating unneeded code and handling EOF and EOR conditions. * io/io.h: Revise prototype for read_sf. * io/transfer.c (read_sf): Delete no_error parameter and all uses of it. Set eof and eor condition flags. (read_block_form): Likewise. (next_record_r): Add condition to call to hit_eof. Modified: branches/gcc-4_4-branch/libgfortran/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_4-branch/libgfortran/io/io.h branches/gcc-4_4-branch/libgfortran/io/read.c branches/gcc-4_4-branch/libgfortran/io/transfer.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #18 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-12 14:36 --- Subject: Bug 43265 Author: jvdelisle Date: Fri Mar 12 14:36:16 2010 New Revision: 157405 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157405 Log: 2010-03-12 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libfortran/43320 PR libfortran/43265 * gfortran.dg/read_eof_6.f: New test * gfortran.dg/read_x_eof.f90: New test. * gfortran.dg/read_x_past.f: Update test. Added: branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/read_eof_6.f branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/read_x_eof.f90 Modified: branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_4-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/read_x_past.f -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #15 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-10 12:42 --- This patch causes a regression in SPEC CPU 2000 (200.sixtrack), see PR 43320. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
-- rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #16 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-11 02:26 --- Subject: Bug 43265 Author: jvdelisle Date: Thu Mar 11 02:26:36 2010 New Revision: 157378 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157378 Log: 2010-03-10 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libfortran/43320 PR libfortran/43265 * gfortran.dg/read_eof_6.f: New test * gfortran.dg/read_x_eof.f90: Update test. * gfortran.dg/read_x_past.f: Update test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/read_eof_6.f trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/read_x_eof.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/read_x_past.f -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #13 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-09 15:36 --- (In reply to comment #11) Regarding the additional test cases given here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-03/msg00037.html I do believe that gfortran has this correct. [...] I believe otherwise and thus think a follow up patch is needed, which covers the related but different issues, cf. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-03/msg00046.html (I think the patch in for this PR (comment 10) is fine and thus I approved it.) Do you plan to backport the patch to 4.4? (Probably not to 4.3, I'd guess.) -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-09 14:41 --- Subject: Bug 43265 Author: jvdelisle Date: Tue Mar 9 14:41:17 2010 New Revision: 157310 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=157310 Log: 2010-03-09 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libfortran/43265 * io/read.c: Include fbuf.h and unix.h to enable lower level I/O for read_x. (read_x): Replace the use of read_sf with equivalent lower level I/O, eliminating unneeded code and handling EOF and EOR conditions. * io/io.h: Revise prototype for read_sf. * io/transfer.c (read_sf): Delete no_error parameter and all uses of it. (read_block_form): Likewise. (next_record_r): Delete wrong code call to hit_eof. Modified: trunk/libgfortran/ChangeLog trunk/libgfortran/io/io.h trunk/libgfortran/io/read.c trunk/libgfortran/io/transfer.c -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #14 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-09 20:13 --- Yes, I will backport to 4.4 in a few days. Regarding a followup patch. There are differences between internal units and how padding is handled and external units. I am certain we have crossed this question before. This is why I have done nothing about it so far. I agree to look into it and report back here. BTW Thanks Terry for reporting the original bug here. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-08 20:19 --- Regarding the additional test cases given here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-03/msg00037.html I do believe that gfortran has this correct. You are not allowed to attempt to read from a location past the end of the file. You can try to tab there and do nothing, but as soon as you attempt to read, it is an EOF codition. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #10 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-06 09:49 --- In terms of the standard, probably everything is OK for I/O: The set of input/output error conditions is processor dependent. (See 9.11.1 General for a non-definition when EOF occurs.) Looking at other compilers: * If X is the only edit descriptor and there is no EOR marker left in the input buffer (i.e. no '\n'), an End Of File error occurs. (gfortran: No error - this PR) * If one reads, e.g. i2 from a record where either only a record marker follows or only the end-of-file, one reads the value 0 and no error occurs. (gfortran: No error if record marker follows, but error if only eof follows. Note that reading '(a)' from aeof does not give an error while reading from eof gives an error.) * If one reads (i2,100x,i2,100x) or (100x,2i2) from a record, one gets two 0 and no error, independent whether the record buffer contains eof, eoreof or eof. (gfortran: If there is a record marker, the result is the same; otherwise an EOF error occurs, unless two integer values could be read - then the trailing 100x does not cause any error.) I think the result of the other compilers is sensible. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-05 09:07 ---
Jerry, can you have a look?
With gfortran 4.1 and 4.2, g95, ifort, openf95, and NAG f95 the program
immediately returns with ended. However, in gfortran 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5 it
simply loops through without hitting end=.
Using * instead of (x) as fmt, I get immediately an End of File - as
expected. (In my case, there was no file and OPEN created an empty one.)
In a way it is not surprising. In io/read.c:
read_x (st_parameter_dt * dtp, int n)
[...]
read_sf (dtp, n, 1);
and then in io/transfer.c:
read_sf (st_parameter_dt *dtp, int * length, int no_error)
[...]
/* If we hit EOF previously with the no_error flag set (i.e. X, T,
TR edit descriptors), and we now try to read again, this time
without setting no_error. */
if (!no_error dtp-u.p.at_eof)
{
*length = 0;
hit_eof (dtp);
return NULL;
}
[...]
base = p = fbuf_read (dtp-u.p.current_unit, length);
if (base == NULL)
return NULL;
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot
||org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
GCC host triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu |
Keywords||wrong-code
Known to fail||4.3.4 4.4.4 4.5.0
Known to work||4.1.2 4.2.1
Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2010-03-05 09:07:49
date||
Summary|Read no longer jumps on end |[4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No
||EOF condition if reading
||with '(x)' from an empty
||file
Target Milestone|--- |4.4.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #2 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2010-03-05 17:02 --- It is caused by revision 123038: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2007-03/msg00628.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-05 18:07 --- (In reply to comment #2) It is caused by revision 123038: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2007-03/msg00628.html Which was a fix for PR 31052: Bad IOSTAT values when readings NAMELISTs past EOF -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-05 23:06 --- Mine, hmm almost exactly three years ago. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot |dot org |org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|2010-03-05 09:07:49 |2010-03-05 23:06:54 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #5 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-06 01:07 --- And this: Index: read.c === --- read.c (revision 157247) +++ read.c (working copy) @@ -1030,7 +1030,7 @@ dtp-u.p.sf_read_comma = 0; if (n 0) -read_sf (dtp, n, 1); +read_sf (dtp, n, 0); dtp-u.p.sf_read_comma = 1; dtp-u.p.current_unit-strm_pos += (gfc_offset) n; } Fixes it, however gfortran.dg/read_x_past.f would fail. Tobias can you see how other compilers handle read_x_past.f? I am wondering if my previous interpretations are incorrect. Also the F95 standard says in 10.6.1: The position specified by an X edit descriptor is forward from the current position. On input, a position beyond the last character of the record may be specified if no characters are transmitted from such positions. This to me means there is no END condition if there is no transfer after the X. I am wondering of this should be an extension, give the END condition with -std=gnu and not with -std=f95? Also, perhaps we should discuss on c.l.f. Obviously it is useful to give this end and not unreasonable, but this contradicts the pr26661 conclusion, or at least we must determine another approach. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-06 03:32
---
Standby folks. This problem has nothing to do with
/* If we hit EOF previously with the no_error flag set (i.e. X, T,
TR edit descriptors), and we now try to read again, this time
without setting no_error. */
if (!no_error dtp-u.p.at_eof)
{
*length = 0;
hit_eof (dtp);
return NULL;
}
That block of code is never executed for either test case. It may even be dead
code. Stay tuned.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #7 from terry at chem dot gu dot se 2010-03-06 03:36 --- Subject: Re: [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file Also the F95 standard says in 10.6.1: The position specified by an X edit descriptor is forward from the current position. On input, a position beyond the last character of the record may be specified if no characters are transmitted from such positions. This to me means there is no END condition if there is no transfer after the X. I am wondering of this should be an extension, give the END condition with -std=gnu and not with -std=f95? Also, perhaps we should discuss on c.l.f. Should I interpret that as being that the code I presented currently behaves in a way consistent with the F95 standard? (Any differences here with the F90 or F77 standards?) It seems that's a critical question, irrespective of any principle of least surprise. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-06 03:54 --- Terry, I will see if the other standards address this or say something different. I would not conclude anything yet about your code. What I can conclude is we have a real bug regardless. We should not have dead code and what it is doing is not consistent with what I expected. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
[Bug fortran/43265] [4.3/4.4/4.5 Regression] No EOF condition if reading with '(x)' from an empty file
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-03-06 05:29 --- The F77, F95, F2003, and F2008 candidate draft all have the exact same wording as given in Comment #5. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43265
