[Bug fortran/33609] ICE on arithmetic overflow

2007-10-06 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-06 23:49 --- Closing, Thanks Dominique for report and testing. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added -

[Bug fortran/33609] ICE on arithmetic overflow

2007-10-06 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-06 23:45 --- Subject: Bug 33609 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sat Oct 6 23:44:48 2007 New Revision: 129059 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=129059 Log: 2007-10-06 Jerry DeLisle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

[Bug fortran/33609] ICE on arithmetic overflow

2007-10-06 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-06 18:49 --- Might as well assign myself -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/33609] ICE on arithmetic overflow

2007-10-06 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-06 18:04 --- The following fixes this: Index: simplify.c === --- simplify.c (revision 129029) +++ simplify.c (working copy) @@ -70,6 +70,9 @@ gfc_expr gfc_bad_

[Bug fortran/33609] ICE on arithmetic overflow

2007-10-06 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-06 17:36 --- Nevermind above comment, I can reproduce the problem with: print *, real(huge(1.0_8),4) end (gdb) bt #0 gfc_range_check (e=0x0) at ../../gcc43/gcc/fortran/arith.c:524 #1 0x00464f29 in range_check (resu

[Bug fortran/33609] ICE on arithmetic overflow

2007-10-06 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-06 15:40 --- I do not get this error on x86-64-Gnu-linux. So I think it is target specific. I am at rev 129029. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33609

[Bug fortran/33609] ICE on arithmetic overflow

2007-10-01 Thread fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-01 20:11 --- This is not target-specific: $ cat u.f90 print *, real(huge(1.0_8),4) end $ gfortran u.f90 u.f90:1.16: print *, real(huge(1.0_8),4) 1 Error: Arithmetic overflow converting REAL(8) to REAL(

[Bug fortran/33609] ICE on arithmetic overflow

2007-10-01 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-01 16:48 --- Subject: Re: ICE on arithmetic overflow > What does -fdump-tree-original give when you use the -fno-range-check > option? MAIN__ () { static int4 options.0[7] = {68, 127, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0}; _gfortran_set_options

[Bug fortran/33609] ICE on arithmetic overflow

2007-10-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-01 16:32 --- (In reply to comment #2) > Subject: Re: ICE on arithmetic overflow > > > What does it do with -fno-range-check? > > compiles and outputs +Infinity > What does -fdump-tree-original give when you use the -fno-range-

[Bug fortran/33609] ICE on arithmetic overflow

2007-10-01 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #2 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2007-10-01 15:13 --- Subject: Re: ICE on arithmetic overflow > What does it do with -fno-range-check? compiles and outputs +Infinity -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33609

[Bug fortran/33609] ICE on arithmetic overflow

2007-10-01 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-10-01 14:44 --- What does it do with -fno-range-check? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33609