[Bug fortran/56919] [4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong result for SYSTEM_CLOCK on Cygwin

2013-04-11 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56919 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus

[Bug fortran/56919] [4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong result for SYSTEM_CLOCK on Cygwin

2013-04-11 Thread jb at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56919 --- Comment #2 from Janne Blomqvist jb at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-11 18:32:19 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) The problem is that Cygwin does not support CLOCK_MONOTONIC; using it will return always return 0. Note that Cygwin not

[Bug fortran/56919] [4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong result for SYSTEM_CLOCK on Cygwin

2013-04-11 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56919 --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-11 20:14:13 UTC --- First, I think we made a thinko with the random_seed example at http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/RANDOM_005fSEED.html it uses (as does Angelo's

[Bug fortran/56919] [4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Wrong result for SYSTEM_CLOCK on Cygwin

2013-04-11 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56919 --- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-11 21:18:43 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) In summary: - Cygwin is probably okay - it just starts from 0 with the first call to system_clock(monotonic,...) which is