This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: Emacs and GFortran
- From: Miles Bader <miles dot bader at necel dot com>
- To: rms at gnu dot org
- Cc: FX Coudert <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>, fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, Angelo dot Graziosi at roma1 dot infn dot it, monnier at iro dot umontreal dot ca, sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu, emacs-devel at gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 11:23:06 +0900
- Subject: Re: Emacs and GFortran
- References: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0610301122450.28710-100000@ax0rm1.roma1.infn.it> <E1Geccz-0006ZL-E4@fencepost.gnu.org> <20061030211304.GB7761@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <jwv7iyh3tnq.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <05DA20E5-B163-4A84-A366-67C848155E8A@gmail.com> <E1Gf5cC-0001EE-Pd@fencepost.gnu.org>
- Reply-to: Miles Bader <miles at gnu dot org>
Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
> In the case you're talking about, it is certainly better to generate 3
> different error messages, one for each of those error loci, using the
> GNU standard format to indicate them.
And in fact, that's what the _existing_ gfortran code seems to do: it
emits 3 separate "loci" lines (using their non-standard format for the
file/line-number), finally followed by the text of the error message.
As far as I can tell, Alfred's one line (!) patch would make things work
perfectly using the standard format.
-Miles
--
Saa, shall we dance? (from a dance-class advertisement)