This is really old school, but a lot of times we have users sending us
copy pasting of codes, and that is the only way to know the version of
the code.
This is mostly a long term maintenance improvement.
Many coding styles require elimination of trailing whitespace, and
many editors and source code management configurations automatically
gobble up whitespace. When these tools gobble up whitespace, it
complicates reviewing the meaningful code changes.
By removing whitespace on one patch, it makes future
code reviews much easier.
=SCRIPT====================================================================
if which tempfile &>/dev/null; then
TEMPMAKER=tempfile
elif which mktemp &>/dev/null; then
TEMPMAKER=mktemp
else
echo "Cannot find tempfile program." 2>&1
exit 1
fi
MYTEMP=$($TEMPMAKER)
trap 'rm -f $MYTEMP' SIGINT SIGTERM
stripit() {
echo "stripping $1"
sed 's/[ \t]*$//' "$1" > $MYTEMP
cp $MYTEMP "$1"
}
if [ $# -gt 0 ]; then
while [ "$1" != "" ]; do
stripit $1
shift
done
else
while read -t 2; do
stripit $REPLY
done
fi
rm $MYTEMP
=================================================
Use \par instead of \details for section.
add a Contributors Section and a Reference Section.
Remove (some) verbatim section when not needed.
Those changes have been done by hand so I am not sure I manage to catch them all.
Bug in RFP routines xTFSM for N=1 independently reported by Jason and Julie.
============================================================================
See Jason's email DEC/27/2009: "Similar problem in xTFSM".
Jason used gfortran with -fbounds-check and got:
> At line 328 of file stfsm.f
> Fortran runtime error: Array reference out of bounds for array 'b', upper bound of dimension 1 exceeded (1 > 0)
Julie also observed the bug with MS Visual Studio.
See ticket http://icl.cs.utk.edu/trac/lapack-dev/ticket/46
The problem is the following. Sometimes in the RFP routines, we
call routines like for example
DGEMM ( M, N, K, ... A( I, J), ...)
where M or N is 0 and A( I, J ) is out-of-bound. The rationale was since M or
N is 0, DGEMM simply exits without doing anything, therefore the out-of-bound
A(I,J) is not an issue. Well, this is not Fortran correct.
In this commit, I have fix the problem for xTFSM. This is a fix. This is not
rocket-science and one can certainly do something more elegant ... This bug is
blocking Julie from porting on Windows so the matter was urgent.
Now RFP + ( gfortan -fbounds-check ) works fine.
TODO: find a cleaner way to fix this,
TODO: Unfortunately I believe there are other bugs like this one in other RFP
routines, always when N=1. See for example xPFTRF. I do not understand why the
TESTING with gfortran -fbounds-check do not trigger an error though ...
https://jason@icl.cs.utk.edu/svn/lapack-dev/lapack/branches/SC08-release
........
r609 | julie | 2008-12-16 17:17:52 -0500 (Tue, 16 Dec 2008) | 1 line
Polish routines to fit the LAPACK framework and allow manpages generation
........
r610 | langou | 2008-12-19 12:12:38 -0500 (Fri, 19 Dec 2008) | 30 lines
bug reported on the forum
https://icl.cs.utk.edu/lapack-forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=854
the complete thread is available at
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/635192e11beadb93#
Tobias Burnus also sent us an email:
> Hello,
>
> this was reported at
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/635192e11beadb93#
>
> The problem is the line 47:
>
> 47: IF( M.EQ.0 .OR. A(M, 1).NE.ZERO .OR. A(M, N).NE.ZERO ) THEN
>
> If M == 0 the one accesses A(0,1) which is invalid as the lower bound is 1
> and not 0.
>
> Note: Contrary to C there is no left-to-right evaluation of expressions in
> Fortran; the order is left to the compiler. One might assume that a smart
> compiler does not evaluate "A(M,1)" if "M==0", however, there is nothing in
> the standard guarantees this.
>
> If bounds checks are turned on (see post at the URL above), gfortran aborts
> with an out-of-bounds error.
........
r611 | julie | 2008-12-19 15:00:58 -0500 (Fri, 19 Dec 2008) | 5 lines
Modify the formatting of the comments.
Replace Note and Notes section by Further Details
This allow the manpages to be generated corectly.
........
r612 | julie | 2008-12-19 16:29:21 -0500 (Fri, 19 Dec 2008) | 3 lines
Reformat the xblas routines comments to be able to generate the manpages
........
r613 | julie | 2008-12-19 16:30:31 -0500 (Fri, 19 Dec 2008) | 1 line
Update version number
........
r614 | jason | 2008-12-27 09:44:45 -0500 (Sat, 27 Dec 2008) | 13 lines
Fix non-short-circuited tests in ILAxL{C,R}.
Fortran doesn't short-circuit logical operators, so the check that the leading
dimension /= 0 may not prevent indexing into a 0-length array.
Reported by "hes selex" in
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/635192e11beadb93
and forwarded to the LAPACK maintainers by Tobias Burnus <burnus@net-b.de>.
Chalk up more bugs found by gfortran's diagnostics!
Signed-off-by: Jason Riedy <ejr@cs.berkeley.edu>
Cc: Tobias Burnus <burnus@net-b.de>
........
Mark Gates