Re: Salford FTN95 Access violation on compile time
- From: nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Richard E Maine)
- Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 08:17:12 -0800
Mathemagician <mathemagician@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Thank you. Upgrading to 4.9.0 did indeed do the trick ! :)
Also thanks for calling it a "compiler bug".
Crashing at compile time is *ALWAYS* a compiler bug. If it were
something wrong with your code, the compiler should bitch and say that
there is something wrong with your code - not just crash.
This is actually a requirement of the Fortran standard (but even if it
weren't required by the standard, it would be required by "normal user
requirements").
From section 1.5 of the standard
"A processor [that's basically standard-speak for compiler
- the distinction isn't relevant for this porpose] conforms
to this standard if
[...]
(8) It contains the capability to detect and report the reason for
rejecting a submitted program."
Note that run-time errors are completely different. There are
innumerable ways that your program might crash at run time, and 99% of
the time, it is the programmer's "fault". But a compile-time crash is a
compiler bug.
--
Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: my first.last at org.domain| experience comes from bad judgment.
org: nasa, domain: gov | -- Mark Twain
.
- References:
- Salford FTN95 Access violation on compile time
- From: Mathemagician
- Re: Salford FTN95 Access violation on compile time
- From: Herman D . Knoble
- Re: Salford FTN95 Access violation on compile time
- From: Mathemagician
- Salford FTN95 Access violation on compile time
- Prev by Date: Re: status of quadruple precision arithmetic in g95 and gfortran?
- Next by Date: Re: status of quadruple precision arithmetic in g95 and gfortran?
- Previous by thread: Re: Salford FTN95 Access violation on compile time
- Next by thread: Efficient neighbourhood searching
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
