[Bug fortran/92896] [10 Regression] [DEC] ICE in reduce_unary, at fortran/arith.c:1283

2019-12-19 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92896 --- Comment #6 from MarkEggleston --- This has been fixed, see comment 5. I do not have permission to changes the status so somebody that does will need to do so.

[Bug fortran/92896] [10 Regression] [DEC] ICE in reduce_unary, at fortran/arith.c:1283

2019-12-11 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92896 --- Comment #4 from MarkEggleston --- reduce_unary (arith (*eval) (gfc_expr *, gfc_expr **), gfc_expr *op, gfc_expr **result) { gfc_constructor_base head; gfc_constructor *c; gfc_expr *r; arith rc; if (op->expr_type ==

[Bug fortran/92896] [10 Regression] [DEC] ICE in reduce_unary, at fortran/arith.c:1283

2019-12-11 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92896 --- Comment #3 from MarkEggleston --- The value 'A' is padded out with spaces giving a value 2314885530818453554. Avoiding the conversion and using the value directly: program p print *, [integer :: 1, [integer(8) :: 2314885530818453554]]

[Bug fortran/89100] Default widths for i, f and g format specifiers in format strings

2019-12-02 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89100 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/48303] [Legacy] Support Character constants in DATA statement for non-character variables

2019-11-20 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48303 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mark.eggleston at codethink dot co

[Bug fortran/92196] New: Regression: -fno-automatic affects local variables in subroutines/function declared with recursive keyword

2019-10-23 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mark.eggleston at codethink dot com Target Milestone: --- I've noticed a change in behaviour regarding the use of -fno-automatic

[Bug fortran/89348] Fortran Command Options documentation fixes

2019-09-20 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89348 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/89286] Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

2019-09-20 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89286 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/89240] Discrepancy in the return kind of MAX and MIN between all literal input parameters and input parameters that are variables

2019-09-20 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89240 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/89078] [meta-bug] Improve the gfortran manual

2019-09-20 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89078 Bug 89078 depends on bug 89236, which changed state. Bug 89236 Summary: Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89236 What|Removed

[Bug fortran/89236] Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension

2019-09-20 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89236 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/89103] Allow blank format items in format strings

2019-09-20 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89103 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/91167] New: -pedantic-errors does not turn -pedantic warnings into errors

2019-07-15 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mark.eggleston at codethink dot com Target Milestone: --- This short program illustrates the problem: program test real*8 :: x = 9.0 write(*,*) x end program test when compiled

[Bug fortran/88079] warn about procedure arguments without INTENT

2019-07-01 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88079 --- Comment #6 from MarkEggleston --- Where a module is used: module foo implicit none interface subroutine dusty(n) integer :: n end subroutine end interface contains subroutine bar(n) integer, intent(in) :: n

[Bug fortran/88079] warn about procedure arguments without INTENT

2019-07-01 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88079 --- Comment #5 from MarkEggleston --- Given the program below: program main implicit none integer :: n n = 5 call bar(n) end program main subroutine bar(n) integer, intent(in) :: n real :: x print *,"bar before dusty", n call

[Bug fortran/88079] warn about procedure arguments without INTENT

2019-07-01 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88079 --- Comment #4 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 46539 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=46539=edit Warn about missing intent or value Work in progress. Warns at declaration, assignment and possible modification of a

[Bug fortran/64958] Warn if INTENT(IN) is changed by passing to no-intent argument

2019-06-28 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64958 --- Comment #9 from MarkEggleston --- using -Wimplicit-interface helps: 7 | call dusty(n) | 1 Warning: Procedure 'dusty' called with an implicit interface at (1) [-Wimplicit-interface] Adding in an interface

[Bug fortran/88079] warn about procedure arguments without INTENT

2019-06-27 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88079 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mark.eggleston at codethink dot co

[Bug fortran/64958] Warn if INTENT(IN) is changed by passing to no-intent argument

2019-06-25 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64958 --- Comment #7 from MarkEggleston --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6) > > Warning is output by gfortran 6.3.0. > > ... > > Not a warning, but an error as it shall. This PR is different: it is about > the case where the

[Bug fortran/64958] Warn if INTENT(IN) is changed by passing to no-intent argument

2019-06-25 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64958 --- Comment #5 from MarkEggleston --- Warning is output by gfortran 6.3.0. program test implicit none integer :: b integer :: c b = 0 c = 7 call sub(b) call sub(c) write(*,*) b, c contains subroutine sub(x) integer,

[Bug fortran/89920] do loop fails to complete

2019-04-02 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89920 --- Comment #2 from MarkEggleston --- Affects 7, 8 and trunk branches. A do loop from 1 to the maximum value of an integer does not exit. The example below has a check that forces the loop to exit. program test implicit none integer(4) ::

[Bug fortran/89920] New: do loop fails to complete

2019-04-02 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mark.eggleston at codethink dot com Target Milestone: ---

[Bug fortran/89431] CPP integer macros not defined

2019-02-22 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89431 --- Comment #7 from MarkEggleston --- The only reason this PR was raised was because an attempt to use conditional compilation based on integer kinds failed because the implementation did not match the documentation. There is no issue with the

[Bug fortran/89431] CPP integer macros not defined

2019-02-21 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89431 --- Comment #4 from MarkEggleston --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3) > program test > use iso_fortran_env > implicit none > write(*,*) integer_kinds > #ifdef __GFC_INT_1__ > write(*,*) "__GFC_INT_1__ defined" > #else

[Bug fortran/89431] CPP integer macros not defined

2019-02-21 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89431 --- Comment #2 from MarkEggleston --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1) > These macros have been introduced at revision r267464. > > Looking at the code I don't see why __GFC_REAL_* are defined, but not > __GFC_INTEGER_*.

[Bug fortran/89431] New: CPP integer macros not defined

2019-02-21 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mark.eggleston at codethink dot com Target Milestone: --- The integer macros specified in the "Preprocessing and conditional compilation" section of the manual do not exist. The real macros on the other hand do. On x86_64: pr

[Bug fortran/89348] Fortran Command Options documentation fixes

2019-02-14 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89348 --- Comment #1 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45715 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45715=edit Change log for gcc/fortran for patch Date has been omitted from change log. Can be added when committed.

[Bug fortran/89348] New: Fortran Command Options documentation fixes

2019-02-14 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mark.eggleston at codethink dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 45714 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45714=edit Fortran options documentation fixes Enabling of -fdec-include is missing f

[Bug fortran/89103] Allow blank format items in format strings

2019-02-14 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89103 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45556|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89103] Allow blank format items in format strings

2019-02-14 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89103 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45604|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89103] Allow blank format items in format strings

2019-02-14 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89103 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45554|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89286] Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

2019-02-13 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89286 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45658|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89286] Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

2019-02-13 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89286 --- Comment #9 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45698 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45698=edit GNU extension to intrinsic SIGN Remove declaration of gfc_check_sign from intrinsic.h has it has been deleted.

[Bug fortran/89100] Default widths for i, f and g format specifiers in format strings

2019-02-13 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89100 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45550|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89100] Default widths for i, f and g format specifiers in format strings

2019-02-13 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89100 --- Comment #10 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45696 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45696=edit Change Log for gcc/testsuite for patch Replace -fdec-format-defaults with PR fortran/89100.

[Bug fortran/89100] Default widths for i, f and g format specifiers in format strings

2019-02-13 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89100 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45603|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89100] Default widths for i, f and g format specifiers in format strings

2019-02-13 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89100 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45548|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89100] Default widths for i, f and g format specifiers in format strings

2019-02-13 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89100 --- Comment #7 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45693 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45693=edit Update to option and Extension documentation Documentation changes in their own difference file so that they can be

[Bug fortran/89286] Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

2019-02-12 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89286 --- Comment #8 from MarkEggleston --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #5) > Patch should go to the fort...@gcc.gnu.org and gcc-patc...@gcc.gnu.org > mailing lists for review. will do. > > From a quick look at the patch it does

[Bug fortran/89286] Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

2019-02-12 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89286 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45659|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89286] Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

2019-02-12 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89286 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45657|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89286] Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

2019-02-11 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89286 --- Comment #4 from MarkEggleston --- Missed some changes that should've gone in the change log. These included a couple of line that shouldn't have been there. Fixing patch and change log and will replace attachments when done.

[Bug fortran/89286] Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

2019-02-11 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89286 --- Comment #3 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45659 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45659=edit Change Log for gcc/testsuite for patch Date to added later.

[Bug fortran/89286] Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

2019-02-11 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89286 --- Comment #2 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45658 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45658=edit Change log for gcc/fortran for patch Date to added later.

[Bug fortran/89286] Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

2019-02-11 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89286 --- Comment #1 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45657 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45657=edit GNU extension to intrinsic SIGN Includes change to Intrinsic documentation.

[Bug fortran/89286] New: Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

2019-02-11 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mark.eggleston at codethink dot com Target Milestone: --- The GNU extension allows different kinds to used in the actual arguments to DIM, MOD, MODULO, MAX and MIN. The description of the arguments for SIGN are the same as for DIM, MOD

[Bug fortran/89240] Discrepancy in the return kind of MAX and MIN between all literal input parameters and input parameters that are variables

2019-02-08 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89240 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45645|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89240] Discrepancy in the return kind of MAX and MIN between all literal input parameters and input parameters that are variables

2019-02-08 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89240 --- Comment #3 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45646 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45646=edit Change log for gcc/fortran for patch

[Bug fortran/89240] Discrepancy in the return kind of MAX and MIN between all literal input parameters and input parameters that are variables

2019-02-08 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89240 --- Comment #4 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45647 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45647=edit Change Log for testsuite for patch

[Bug fortran/89240] Discrepancy in the return kind of MAX and MIN between all literal input parameters and input parameters that are variables

2019-02-08 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89240 --- Comment #2 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45645 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45645=edit Fix return kind for max and min Also includes update to the intrinsic documentation.

[Bug fortran/89236] Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension

2019-02-07 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89236 --- Comment #11 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45634 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45634=edit Updated change log for gcc/fortran for patch Change no longer affects MAX and MIN.

[Bug fortran/89236] Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension

2019-02-07 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89236 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45629|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89236] Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension

2019-02-07 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89236 --- Comment #9 from MarkEggleston --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #5) > (In reply to MarkEggleston from comment #3) > > Looks like I missed MIN with literals. > > > > integer(2) :: a2 > > integer(4) :: a4 > > write(*,*) kind(max(7,

[Bug fortran/89240] New: Discrepancy in the return kind of MAX and MIN between all literal input parameters and input parameters that are variables

2019-02-07 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
Version: 9.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mark.eggleston at codethink dot com Target Milestone: --- Return kind differs when actual arguments

[Bug fortran/89236] Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension

2019-02-07 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89236 --- Comment #8 from MarkEggleston --- (In reply to kargl from comment #7) > (In reply to MarkEggleston from comment #0) > > Created attachment 45626 [details] > > Add GNU extension notes to DIM, MOD, MODULO, MAX and MIN > > > > Missing notes

[Bug fortran/89236] Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension

2019-02-07 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89236 --- Comment #6 from MarkEggleston --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #5) > (In reply to MarkEggleston from comment #3) > > Looks like I missed MIN with literals. > > > > integer(2) :: a2 > > integer(4) :: a4 > > write(*,*) kind(max(7,

[Bug fortran/89236] Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension

2019-02-07 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89236 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45626|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89236] Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension

2019-02-07 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89236 --- Comment #3 from MarkEggleston --- Looks like I missed MIN with literals. integer(2) :: a2 integer(4) :: a4 write(*,*) kind(max(7, 9_1)) write(*,*) kind(max(7_2, 9)) write(*,*) kind(max(a2, a4)) write(*,*) kind(min(7_2, 9)) write(*,*)

[Bug fortran/89236] Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension

2019-02-07 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89236 --- Comment #1 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45627 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45627=edit Change log for gcc/fortran for patch No date as it should inserted when patch is committed.

[Bug fortran/89236] New: Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension

2019-02-07 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mark.eggleston at codethink dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 45626 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45626=edit Add GNU extension no

[Bug fortran/89103] Allow blank format items in format strings

2019-02-05 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89103 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #4|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89100] Default widths for i, f and g format specifiers in format strings

2019-02-05 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89100 MarkEggleston changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #45549|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/89103] Allow blank format items in format strings

2019-01-29 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89103 --- Comment #2 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45556 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45556=edit Change Log for gc/testsuite for patch

[Bug fortran/89103] Allow blank format items in format strings

2019-01-29 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89103 --- Comment #1 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 4 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=4=edit Change log for gcc/fortran for patch

[Bug fortran/89103] New: Allow blank format items in format strings

2019-01-29 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mark.eggleston at codethink dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 45554 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45554=edit Patch to allow blank item in format gfortran as of revision: svn+

[Bug fortran/89100] Default widths for i, f and g format specifiers in format strings

2019-01-29 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89100 --- Comment #3 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45551 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45551=edit Change Log for testsuite for patch

[Bug fortran/89100] Default widths for i, f and g format specifiers in format strings

2019-01-29 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89100 --- Comment #2 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45550 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45550=edit Change Log for libgfortran for patch

[Bug fortran/89100] Default widths for i, f and g format specifiers in format strings

2019-01-29 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89100 --- Comment #1 from MarkEggleston --- Created attachment 45549 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45549=edit Change log for gcc/fortran for patch

[Bug fortran/89100] New: Default widths for i, f and g format specifiers in format strings

2019-01-29 Thread mark.eggleston at codethink dot com
Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: mark.eggleston at codethink dot com Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 45548 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=45548=edit Patch to support default wid