Re: [patch,doc] Clarify role of -fdollar-ok vs. IMPLICIT statements

[FX <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>]

> But does so by removing the clarification attempt that I put in for  
> PR39670
> less than a month ago :)
>
> I think that the clause that it won't be implemented due to different
> implementations by different vendors should be kept (don't mind a  
> different
> wording, but keep the message). See also PR39670 for a lengthy  
> discussion.

I've committed a version adding my line without removing yours:


2009-05-07  Francois-Xavier Coudert  <fxcoudert@gcc.gnu.org>

	PR fortran/36382
	* invoke.texi: Document that -fdollar-ok does not allow $ to be
	used in IMPLICIT statement.


Index: invoke.texi
===================================================================
--- invoke.texi	(revision 147252)
+++ invoke.texi	(working copy)
@@ -259,6 +259,7 @@
 Allow @samp{$} as a valid non-first character in a symbol name.  
Symbols
 that start with @samp{$} are rejected since it is unclear which  
rules to
 apply to implicit typing as different vendors implement different  
rules.
+Using @samp{$} in @code{IMPLICIT} statements is also rejected.

 @item -fbackslash
 @opindex @code{backslash}