Re: [gfortran] Add new -std=legacy command line option

[Feng Wang <wf_cs at yahoo dot com>]

--- Janne Blomqvist <jblomqvi@cc.hut.fi> 写道:
> On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 01:59:22PM -0600, Roger Sayle wrote:
> > 
> > The following patch refines the semantics of gfortran's extensions
> > into two categories; GFC_STD_GNU for useful functionality not defined
> > in any official fortran standard (i.e. stuff we're proud of) and
> > GFC_STD_LEGACY for functionality we're forced to support for backward
> > compatibility with other compilers and crusty dusty-deck fortran
> > (i.e. the stuff we're embarassed by).
> > 
> > Making this distiction allows us to fine-tune the default behaviour
> > of gfortran, to accept both kinds of extensions but to warn about
> > the latter.  This is the behaviour of -std=gnu.  As an enhancement
> > to shut up these warnings, I've also added -std=legacy which makes
> > a best effort to compile whatever it can without warnings.  I've
> > also allowed -pedantic to pretty much undo -std=legacy warning wise,
> > and effectively "-std=legacy -pedantic" is equivalent to "-std=gnu".
> 
> I like the general idea. Perhaps I would personally have chosen
> GFC_STD_DUSTY, but I guess _LEGACY is just as good and working code
> beats talk any day. ;-)
>  
> > Although there are no users of this infrastructure yet, it should
> > resolve the LOGICAL <-> INTEGER conversion issue to everyone's
> > staisfaction and allow extensions such as using real numbers to
> > index arrays, or omitting commas to reclassified as GFC_STD_LEGACY.
> > These are really things that warning about, and writers of new code
> > should be exposed to these warnings even without specifying
> > -pedantic or -std=f95.
> 
> I think stuff like Hollerith would be well suited for GFC_STD_LEGACY
> as well (wasn't there a patch to add Hollerith support a few days
> ago?).
Yes. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-05/msg00280.html
I think the Hollerith constant is different. When people use Hollerith
constants, they are clear that this statement should be supported by the
compiler. I mean the compiler should not accept user's error and meanwhile
should not reject user's intention. LOGICAL <-> INTEGER conversion may be the
error of the programmer (e.g. typo error). But Hollerith constant will not. I
think it had better be the proud of gnu. Haha... :-)



Best Regards,
Feng Wang

--
Creative Compiler Research Group,
National University of Defense Technology, China.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
150万曲MP3疯狂搜，带您闯入音乐殿堂
http://music.yisou.com/
美女明星应有尽有，搜遍美图、艳图和酷图
http://image.yisou.com
1G就是1000兆，雅虎电邮自助扩容！
http://cn.rd.yahoo.com/mail_cn/tag/1g/*http://cn.mail.yahoo.com/event/mail_1g/