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: intrinsic functions not yet documented

From: FX Coudert <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>
To: Daniel Franke <franke dot daniel at gmail dot com>
Cc: fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 23:32:35 +0200
Subject: Re: intrinsic functions not yet documented
References: <200607040009.57134.franke.daniel@gmail.com> <44AA0DE8.7020008@gmail.com> <200607042322.18685.franke.daniel@gmail.com>

Where appropiate, I would like to introduce an additional "See also" section, e.g. * IAnd, see also IOr, IEOr * lbound, see also ubound * iargc, see also getarg, get_command, get_command_argument * ... to be continued

Any objections?

I don't think there will be any objections.

By the way, I think it might be worth replacing the "option" section ("f95" or "gnu" or both) by a "Standards" section, which could state "new in F95", "F77, F95 and F2003", "new in F2003", "GNU extension" or things like that. Do you like the idea?

FX

Follow-Ups:
- Re: intrinsic functions not yet documented
  - From: Steve Kargl
- Re: intrinsic functions not yet documented
  - From: Daniel Franke
- Re: intrinsic functions not yet documented
  - From: Daniel Franke

References:
- intrinsic functions not yet documented
  - From: Daniel Franke
- Re: intrinsic functions not yet documented
  - From: FX Coudert
- Re: intrinsic functions not yet documented
  - From: Daniel Franke

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