This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug fortran/19292] [meta-bug] g77 features lacking in gfortran
- From: "tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 8 Jan 2006 13:18:46 -0000
- Subject: [Bug fortran/19292] [meta-bug] g77 features lacking in gfortran
- References: <bug-19292-8513@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #17 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-08 13:18 -------
Instead of continuing a pointless flame war in a PR which is only
organisationally related to the bug we're talking about, let me explain a few
procedural details which will hopefully make you understand that noone called
your colleague's code names.
You submitted a bug which was closed as a duplicate of an existing bug. In the
existing bug, the submitter (who by that time wasn't yet a developer of
gfortran) dismissed as "excremental" an artificial example which demonstrates a
bad coding practice that has not been allowed by any Fortran standard since
1978. Somehow you form the opinion that Paul insulted your colleague, and
question Paul's motivations and skills. (WRT Let me just say that Paul has
fixed 105 PRs during the last year alone -- obviously he thought they were more
important than this bug which he reported.)
I understand your frustration that this bug hasn't yet been closed, and I'm
grateful that you're using gfortran and reporting bugs, but I think that
everybody's time could be better spent than by arguing about who insulted who
and how the standard should be quoted.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19292