[Bug fortran/40165] Excessive warnings for REAL DO loops

["burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Comment #9 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org  2010-05-05 07:34 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> This could backfire. Consider applications that make extensive use of computed
> GOTOs, PAUSE or any of the other deleted features. Shall we introduce flags for
> selectively enable/disable any of them? That's what -std={legacy|gnu|f*} does.

I am in favour of doing so at some point - that's what other compilers also
have:

a) g95 has numbers associated to warnings ("Warning (137): ....") and has the
options:
-Werror=numbers Change the comma-separated list of warnings into errors.
-Wno=numbers Disable a comma separated list of warnings indicated by numbers.

b) ifort also has numbers ("remark #7712: ...")
-diag-* options, e.g. "-diag-disable 7712"

c) gcc: It at least attaches the option name after the warning and offers a
more fine-grained control; example for the former:
aaa.c:3:6: warning: unused variable ?i? [-Wunused-variable]
                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(Enabled by default; controllable via -fdiagnostics-show-option - gfortran
currently ignores this option.)


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40165