On 01/28/2013 10:14 AM, Tim Prince wrote:
On 01/28/2013 09:02 AM, Mark Hounschell wrote:I am porting some very old code. I have many things like below in this code program test implicit none integer*1 ivalx1 integer*2 ivalx2 integer*4 ivalx4 parameter (ivalx1 = x'80') parameter (ivalx2 = x'8000') parameter (ivalx4 = x'80000000') The compiler fails with: f77 test.f test.f:8.26: parameter (ivalx1 = x'80') 1 Error: Arithmetic overflow converting INTEGER(8) to INTEGER(1) at (1). This check can be disabled with the option -fno-range-check test.f:9.26: parameter (ivalx2 = x'8000') 1 Error: Arithmetic overflow converting INTEGER(8) to INTEGER(2) at (1). This check can be disabled with the option -fno-range-check test.f:10.26: parameter (ivalx4 = x'80000000') 1 Error: Arithmetic overflow converting INTEGER(8) to INTEGER(4) at (1). This check can be disabled with the option -fno-range-check I don't want to use the -fno-range-check option because I want to know about the real ones. I don't understand why gfortran has issues with this. They are certainly valid values for the the types specified. I have been, just setting the values in the code section using the 'transfer' instrinsic but now I'm finding these in include files and I would have to change every source file that used the particular include file. I'm sure there is an easy solution. Could someone enlighten me please. Thanks and Regards MarkPerhaps you could arrange to make the constants come out as x'80'_1, x'8000'_2, x'80000000'_4, or -1_1, -1_2, -1_4. The values you set aren't valid positive integer values in the smaller type.
Why must it be a valid "positive integer"? How/why does the compiler even know/care whether I am going to use this data for an arithmetic operation or not. Even if I was, it should be up to me to be able to set the sign bit myself. x'80' is a valid negative integer*1 etc...
Regards Mark
