This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug fortran/84778] Issue with character arguments of specified length (does not compile)
- From: "sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 15:28:26 +0000
- Subject: [Bug fortran/84778] Issue with character arguments of specified length (does not compile)
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-84778-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84778
--- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> ---
On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 10:16:19AM +0000, david.applegate at woodplc dot com
wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84778
>
> --- Comment #3 from david.applegate at woodplc dot com ---
> Thanks for the reply and the clarification.
>
> I have two comments to make regarding this if I may...
>
> 1) Previous gfortran compilers were happy with the code.
> I also tested g95 and Ifort (admittedly aged versions
> of both). Ifort also refused to compile the code while
> g95 did compile the code (you may not care I guess). It
> is slightly irritating that gfortran is essentially not
> backwards compatible with previous versions. Maybe
> gfortran should compile this code unless the users
> specify one of the -std=f95/f2003/f2008 switches?
If we wrapped every bug fix in a -std option, the gfortran
source code would become unreadable.
> 2) What about array declaration? Gfortran 7.3 is happy to
> compile the following code, which presumably does not
> conform to the standard you mention, while Ifort refuses
> to compile this code:
It seems that you have found another bug. It may one day
be fixed.