[Bug fortran/38291] Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*

2008-12-06 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #12 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-06 21:54 --- Subject: Bug 38291 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sat Dec 6 21:53:11 2008 New Revision: 142528 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=142528 Log: 2008-12-06 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug fortran/38291] Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*

2008-12-05 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-06 04:15 --- Subject: Bug 38291 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sat Dec 6 04:13:34 2008 New Revision: 142515 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=142515 Log: 2008-12-05 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug fortran/38291] Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*

2008-12-05 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-06 04:19 --- Subject: Bug 38291 Author: jvdelisle Date: Sat Dec 6 04:17:31 2008 New Revision: 142516 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=142516 Log: 2008-12-05 Jerry DeLisle [EMAIL PROTECTED] PR

[Bug fortran/38291] Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*

2008-12-05 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #11 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-06 04:19 --- Fixed on trunk. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug fortran/38291] Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*

2008-12-04 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-05 05:39 --- The alternating error was an artefact of the test case and not part of the bug. I have submitted a fixed patch that eliminates the incorrect EOF error. I will commit soon. --

[Bug fortran/38291] Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*

2008-12-03 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-04 05:32 --- I am holding off on committing the patch. With this test case I have found a nasty problem: ! { dg-do run } ! PR38291 Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=* character(15) :: sAccess character(1) :: instr open(50,

[Bug fortran/38291] Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*

2008-12-01 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-01 16:32 --- So the read statement by itself is invalid. ??? I was testing with and without the open statement in the test case and saw that we were not catching that error either. Regardless, the problem is that I was

[Bug fortran/38291] Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*

2008-12-01 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-01 16:40 --- (In reply to comment #4) So the read statement by itself is invalid. ??? I was testing with and without the open statement in the test case and saw that we were not catching that error either. Ah, you are

[Bug fortran/38291] Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*

2008-12-01 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-02 05:35 --- Patch submitted. There is ABI breakage with 4.3 in that patch I noticed after I submitted, so I am now testing some tweaks. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38291

[Bug fortran/38291] Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*

2008-11-30 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-01 03:55 --- read( 50, *, pos = 1 ) is valid only if the unit has been connected for STREAM access. F2003 9.5.1.10POS= specifier in a data transfer statement The POS= specifier specifies the file position in file

[Bug fortran/38291] Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*

2008-11-30 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-01 06:44 --- read( 50, *, pos = 1 ) is valid only if the unit has been connected for STREAM access. Well, (a) I don't see how this can be tested at compile time and (b) I thought that open(50,access='stream') is doing so.

[Bug fortran/38291] Rejects I/O with POS= if FMT=*

2008-11-27 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-27 14:20 --- I am on it. -- jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added