This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: [libgfortran,patch] Wide char part 4, library support
- From: FX <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>
- To: Tobias Burnus <burnus at net-b dot de>
- Cc: Fortran List <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:58:19 +0100
- Subject: Re: [libgfortran,patch] Wide char part 4, library support
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:message-id:cc:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; bh=zZ1RKfju9uapxqVr2FLLFpGysh3C1d7RjyCDJHM0BbU=; b=wT4DDnzCVDtsOcLKDpOyePq00HL+kevwx+hxFtyNpUD17U17HXp03OFDYQOiSG9Y8F0VM8cwl1gC8/LIsoOu4KKAjiY2YTk2Jvg1iC9GQAJ3Mq0vQuegPuuTtuhOxasjQ7ZAMue+1Cz9IA4gvFQR0g7A0NFxHpccpQZHCyr7ENU=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:message-id:cc:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer; b=M9/MvczPh5SBQD05Hd4OpczGyRA7An2pO1l8RWOLbUexK3EJz75AzCDWMy1v0cWqf8bqVW1dUJ3bOwU8jgPLun714iFS6/gau+1M72c7TSzaZSnwvSZppaMEPu8CJ3BPCZx1ahxT3QV08sDe0UeFFcGZukO65Bn2H9jTZsTRFgw=
- References: <FB9D0B04-9822-4362-BC33-DE21F6FE7BC8@gmail.com> <482B121C.3040003@net-b.de>
I was wondering whether one should warn for/reject default kind (=
1) literals with non-ascii characters with -pedantic.
I don't think we should, because quite a few people use 8-bit
characters in default character kinds. It's not hard to do if we want
to, though.
Do you plan to enable character kind = 4 support even without I/O
support? I think one could do so, but until UTF-8 is supported our
implementation would not be Fortran 2003 conform. (When a wide-char
kind is available, UTF-8 I/O needs to be supported; if not, it does
not need to.)
Hum, I planned to go ahead and see how to do UTF-8 encoding (it
shouldn't be too hard). If I fail to make it for 4.4, we can always
remove that support at the last minute, for example by only a small
modification to SELECTED_CHAR_KIND so that it doesn't indicate that
UCS-4 is available. What do you think of that plan?
FX
--
François-Xavier Coudert
http://www.homepages.ucl.ac.uk/~uccafco/