Re: [PATCH, Fortran] PR 33141: Better diagnostics and handling of intrinsics with -std=* settings

[Daniel Kraft <d at domob dot eu>]

Daniel Kraft wrote:
> FYI, that's the updated patch for the changes described below.

Committed as rev 138122. Will update the wiki now.

Thanks,
Daniel

> Daniel
>
> Daniel Kraft wrote:
> > Tobias Burnus wrote:
> > > "Warning: The intrinsic 'abort' at (1) is not included in the selected
> > >  standard (GNU Fortran extension) and 'abort' will be treated as if
> > >  declared EXTERNAL.  Use an appropriate -std=* option or define
> > >  -fall-intrinsics to allow this intrinsic."
> > >
> > > "in the selected standard (GNU Fortran exension)" sounds as if one used
> > > -std=gnu instead of, e.g., -std=f95. Additionally, warning/error
> > > messages in gfortran do not end with a ".".  Maybe better:
> > >
> > > "Warning: 'abort' at (1) is not an intrinsic in the selected standard
> > >  but a GNU extension. It will be treated as if declared EXTERNAL.  Use
> > >  an appropriate -std=* option or define -fall-intrinsics to allow this
> > >  intrinsic"
> > >
> > > But maybe someone else comes up with an even better wording.
> >
> > I tried to get something easy to translate and language-independent 
> > (because those "GNU Fortran extension", "new in Fortran 2003" and such 
> > are substituted), but you're right.  I suggest to change those 
> > standard-names to
> >
> > "a GNU Fortran extension", "new in XXX", "for backwards compatibility"...
> >
> > so that we can do use your suggested message:
> >
> > is not an intrinsic in...but %s. It will...
> >
> > Is this ok, even for a translator's point of view?  At least for 
> > German, where I can tell, this can be translated fairly straight:
> >
> > "eine GNU Fortran Erweiterung", "neu in XXX", "für Legacy-Code 
> > gedacht"...
> > ist nicht im gewählten Standard enthalten, sondern %s.
> >
> > which works out well.
> >
> > > +/* Check if the passed name is name of an intrinsic (taking into accout
> > > the
> > >
> > > Spelling: account
> >
> > Oops, will be changed of course.
> >
> > > > The patch was regression tested and bootstrapped on GNU/Linux-x86-32
> > > > without any failures.  Ok to commit?
> > > OK. But maybe wait one day or two to give other a chance to comment.
> >
> > I'll check it in tomorrow evening (europe) if no updates.
> >
> > > Can you additionally update
> > > http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GFortran#news
> > > (At some point we need to convert those items into a patch for
> > >  http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.4/changes.html )
> >
> > Ok, I'll update the wiki with the new/removed flag(s).
> >
> > Thanks for the review,
> > Daniel


--
Done:     Arc-Bar-Sam-Val-Wiz, Dwa-Elf-Gno-Hum-Orc, Law-Neu-Cha, Fem-Mal
Underway: Cav-Dwa-Law-Fem
To go:    Cav-Hea-Kni-Mon-Pri-Ran-Rog-Tou