[Bug fortran/52594] no traceback expected for explicit fortran stop command combined with -fbacktrace
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52594 --- Comment #7 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-12-14 08:44:44 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) I was just about to file a bugreport that STOP 1 should yield a backtrace if compiled with -fbacktrace that would really be useful to debug code that just calls 'STOP 1' on some error condition (of course happening only with 1 MPI tasks, so no gdb as far as I can manage). I would be happy to have -fbacktrace=STOP as a way to specify more explicitly when an error should happen (generalizable to -fbacktrace=STOP,ALLOCATE,... ?) FWIW, you can get a backtrace by calling the ABORT intrinsic instead.
[Bug fortran/52594] no traceback expected for explicit fortran stop command combined with -fbacktrace
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52594 --- Comment #8 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 2012-12-14 08:47:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) FWIW, you can get a backtrace by calling the ABORT intrinsic instead. thanks... I'm using that now. However, that requires changing a lot of places in the code unfortunately (and abort is an extension, so we can't put it in the code 1-to-1).
[Bug fortran/52594] no traceback expected for explicit fortran stop command combined with -fbacktrace
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52594 Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch changed: What|Removed |Added CC||Joost.VandeVondele at mat ||dot ethz.ch --- Comment #6 from Joost VandeVondele Joost.VandeVondele at mat dot ethz.ch 2012-12-14 07:59:30 UTC --- I was just about to file a bugreport that STOP 1 should yield a backtrace if compiled with -fbacktrace that would really be useful to debug code that just calls 'STOP 1' on some error condition (of course happening only with 1 MPI tasks, so no gdb as far as I can manage). I would be happy to have -fbacktrace=STOP as a way to specify more explicitly when an error should happen (generalizable to -fbacktrace=STOP,ALLOCATE,... ?)
[Bug fortran/52594] no traceback expected for explicit fortran stop command combined with -fbacktrace
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52594 Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||jb at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||WONTFIX --- Comment #5 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-06 07:48:30 UTC --- Based on the discussion here, 4.7+ already does what the reporter wants. For 4.6 and older releases, as it isn't a regression we shouldn't change the behavior. Hence, closing as wontfix.
[Bug fortran/52594] no traceback expected for explicit fortran stop command combined with -fbacktrace
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52594 --- Comment #2 from Jos de Kloe kloedej at knmi dot nl 2012-03-16 08:28:11 UTC --- Thanks for your answer. Using stop 0 or stop 1 would indeed be a way around, but the awkward thing is that I do have some requirements to produce different values for the exit status for different error conditions. So using stop 1 everywhere is no solution for me. Anyway, this bug is just a feature request, so it is up to you developers to decide if you want to implement this or not.
[Bug fortran/52594] no traceback expected for explicit fortran stop command combined with -fbacktrace
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52594 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-16 11:13:17 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) Thanks for your answer. Using stop 0 or stop 1 would indeed be a way around I am lost. With GCC 4.6 and an explicit -fbacktrace, I *do* get a backtrace for any nonzero integer/exit status in STOP/ERROR STOP. (And none for zero.) In GCC 4.7 and 4.8 (which have -fbacktrace already implicitly), I *do* *not* get a backtrace for STOP/ERROR STOP, independent whether the integer is nonzero or not. Anyway, this bug is just a feature request, so it is up to you developers to decide if you want to implement this or not. I still believe that GCC 4.7 and 4.8 handle it - by default - as you would like. (Cf. http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GFortranBinaries ; if you are under Linux, your distribution will likely have some 4.7 packages available - either in some special branch or in their development version, cf. also http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GFortranDistros)
[Bug fortran/52594] no traceback expected for explicit fortran stop command combined with -fbacktrace
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52594 --- Comment #4 from Jos de Kloe kloedej at knmi dot nl 2012-03-16 11:36:48 UTC --- I am lost. The way around that I mentioned was for gcc 4.7+ (so I cannot test this right away, but will upgrade as soon as it is feasible for me). Anyway, thanks for your thoughts.
[Bug fortran/52594] no traceback expected for explicit fortran stop command combined with -fbacktrace
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52594 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-15 18:57:49 UTC --- Using the current GCC 4.6 (4.6.4 20120310), I get by default no backtrace. Only with -fbacktrace, I indeed get a backtrace when using STOP 1 but not one for STOP 0. Solution: Use -fno-backtrace (which is the default in 4.6). With GCC 4.7 (and 4.8) -fbacktrace is now enabled default. However, you no longer get a backtrace for STOP 1 or ERROR STOP 1. Thus, I think GCC 4.7 and 4.8 do what you want. (GCC 4.7.0 will be released in the next days, 4.8 is the current developer version.)
