This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch,doc] Clarify role of -fdollar-ok vs. IMPLICIT statements
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}