This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: .f03 files
- From: Tobias Burnus <burnus at net-b dot de>
- To: "Christopher D. Rickett" <crickett at lanl dot gov>
- Cc: fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 23:11:23 +0100
- Subject: Re: .f03 files
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0701051448470.10224@lennox.lanl.gov>
Hi Chris,
Christopher D. Rickett wrote:
> how difficult would it be to get gfortran to accept files with .f03/.F03
> extensions?
>
Is there really a need for supporting this extension?
Actually, .f = fixed form (Fortran 77, 90, 95, 2003, 2008) and .f90 =
free form (Fortran 90, 95, 2003, 2008) should be enough. I don't think
any compiler which supports .f95, .f03 / .f2003 treats those files any
different than .f90 (or even .f with the -ffree-form option).
I'm thus a bit reluctant to offer this option. But as other compilers
inevitably will add this suffix (such as sunf95, which has it already),
we should probably add it.
Tobias
Index: gcc/fortran/lang-specs.h
===================================================================
--- gcc/fortran/lang-specs.h (Revision 120496)
+++ gcc/fortran/lang-specs.h (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
-fpreprocessed %{!nostdinc:-fintrinsic-modules-path finclude%s} %{!fsyntax-only:%(invoke_as)}}}}", 0, 0, 0},
{".F90", "@f95-cpp-input", 0, 0, 0},
{".F95", "@f95-cpp-input", 0, 0, 0},
+{".F03", "@f95-cpp-input", 0, 0, 0},
{"@f95-cpp-input",
"cc1 -E -lang-fortran -traditional-cpp -D_LANGUAGE_FORTRAN %(cpp_options) \
%{E|M|MM:%(cpp_debug_options)}\
@@ -26,6 +27,7 @@
-fpreprocessed %{!nostdinc:-fintrinsic-modules-path finclude%s} %{!fsyntax-only:%(invoke_as)}}}}", 0, 0, 0},
{".f90", "@f95", 0, 0, 0},
{".f95", "@f95", 0, 0, 0},
+{".f03", "@f95", 0, 0, 0},
{"@f95", "%{!E:f951 %i %(cc1_options) %{J*} %{I*}\
%{!nostdinc:-fintrinsic-modules-path finclude%s} %{!fsyntax-only:%(invoke_as)}}", 0, 0, 0},
{".f", "@f77", 0, 0, 0},