This is the mail archive of the fortran@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR27613 - Recursive functions


On May 23, 2006, at 7:25 AM, Paul Thomas wrote:
 [about requirements for RESULT clause with direct recursion]

I knew I did not whisk my understanding of this out of thin air: To quote the Digital Fortran Reference manual:

8.4.1.1 Recursion
...
I will add the standard requirement but it has been niggling at me as to where I got the idea from.

That's quite believable. After all, Digital (and some other vendors) had recursion long before the f90 standard... and also before array- valued functions. I didn't recall all the details, but it makes sense.


You might run into people wanting some cases of the nonstandard forms as an extension. As you know, I'm not generally a big fan of many extensions, but I'll stay out of that aspect. As extensions go, I don't consider that one particularly "bad". I just wanted to clarify which cases are standard-conforming, and which ones are extensions. (And if you do allow the extension, I'd argue strongly for diagnosing it when diagnosis of extensions is asked for. It seems like this one should be easy to diagnose in such a way).

--
Richard Maine                |  Good judgment comes from experience;
Richard.Maine@nasa.gov       |  experience comes from bad judgment.
                            |        -- Mark Twain


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]