This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: [Patch, fortran] PR19262 more than thirty-nine continuation lines should issue a std-warn
- From: "François-Xavier Coudert" <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>
- To: "Jerry DeLisle" <jvdelisle at verizon dot net>
- Cc: "Fortran List" <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 09:08:02 +0200
- Subject: Re: [Patch, fortran] PR19262 more than thirty-nine continuation lines should issue a std-warn
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Jce3WNlkDXN9ovHsLgI527OvXqW1oFMBO5O632YoIHapqAbetlTxcEIukwALlRtWCSpRq3ypQ1944Q8KeV8xw7dx8vdd+y8z/+ki/El8lmVSVIO6OCtw34LG31ajfe/39i0OsuujXVn5i2bQuya/USDcvGFb3C9QF0VkViVn828=
- References: <20060923204035.291370@gmx.net> <4515E3AB.3000904@verizon.net> <451A1C49.9090505@verizon.net>
I am also issuing a warning if the respective limit is exceeded when -pedantic
is given, regardless of any -std specified.
In my view, that contradicts the general working of -pedantic as a
flag turning extensions (wrt the standard applying, be it explicitly
specified or not) warnings into errors, to require full
standard-checking. Why not use completely notification_std, and issue
an error if it returns ERROR and a warning if it returns WARNING (and
nothing if it returns SILENT, of course)?
FX