This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: [patch, fortran] PR35420, PR36421, PR35422 g0, gw.d, and a0 format descriptors
- From: Tobias Burnus <tobias dot burnus at physik dot fu-berlin dot de>
- To: fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 22:20:26 +0200
- Subject: Re: [patch, fortran] PR35420, PR36421, PR35422 g0, gw.d, and a0 format descriptors
Jerry DeLisle wrote:
> 2008-06-07 Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle@gcc.gnu.org>
>
> PR fortran/36420, 36422
>
Please use one line per PR.
+ return gfc_notify_std (GFC_STD_F2008, "F2008 Feature: 'G0' in "
For consistency, please use "Fortran 2008:".
(And update the third test case.)
Actually, you could also change:
gfc_error ("F2003 Feature: ROUND= specifier at %C not implemented");
+ if (t == FMT_G && u == FMT_ZERO)
+ {
+ if (compile_options.allow_std < GFC_STD_F2008
+ || dtp->u.p.mode == READING)
+ {
+ fmt->error = zero_width;
+ goto finished;
I'm not quite sure whether one should do run-time standard conformance
checking: Assume this occurs in a rarely used branch of the code
then the program all of a sudden stops working and no source code can be
found (e.g. commercial application). Additionally, it is not clear from
the error message that this is a -std= problem.
Therefore I personally like compile-time -std= checks, but dislike
run-time standard-conformance checks. I leave it to you whether you keep
the check. (If you remove the GFC_STD_F2008 check, you need to change the
write into a read in test case 2.)
Otherwise the patch is OK.
Tobias