This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: gfortran error format (was: Re: Emacs and GFortran)
- From: Erik Edelmann <erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi>
- To: Richard Stallman <rms at gnu dot org>
- Cc: François-Xavier Coudert <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>, ams at gnu dot org, fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, wt at atmos dot colostate dot edu, sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu, emacs-devel at gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 09:54:50 +0200
- Subject: Re: gfortran error format (was: Re: Emacs and GFortran)
- References: <19c433eb0611020608v3695ef7ex7cbe998347760d19@mail.gmail.com> <E1GftA1-0004gc-9r@fencepost.gnu.org>
On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 02:08:17AM -0500, Richard Stallman wrote:
> If someone wants to propose a complete patch (against subversion
> mainline) that works, regression-tests fine, please send it and it
> will be reviewed like any other patch.
>
> A change to make GFortran comply with GNU standards should be reviewed
> for correctness, of course, but not "like any other patch".
> Maintainers should keep in mind that this is a problem that needs to
> be fixed. If users don't provide a suitable patch, the maintainers
> should procure for one to be written.
We will, sooner or later. But there are 123 other bugs (enhancement
requests not counted) in Bugzilla for Gfortran right now. They need to
be fixed too. We see no reason to give higher priority to this bug
than to the others.
If GNU standard conformance for error messages is more important/urgent
than ICE-on-valid-code and rejects-valid-code in your opinion, feel free
to argue about it. If you are really convincing, I promise to put it as
the next item on my personal TODO-list. Otherwise I'll concentrate on
fixing a few other bugs first.
Erik