This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug fortran/60751] Extra comma in WRITE statement not diagnosed
- From: "sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2014 16:52:49 +0000
- Subject: [Bug fortran/60751] Extra comma in WRITE statement not diagnosed
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-60751-4 at http dot gcc dot gnu dot org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60751
--- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> ---
On Sun, Apr 06, 2014 at 03:45:08PM +0000, w6ws at earthlink dot net wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60751
>
> --- Comment #9 from Walter Spector <w6ws at earthlink dot net> ---
> Harald and Steve: I am quite aware of the std= options, thanks.
>
> My main point is that the default situation violates the Principle of Least
> Astonishment.
And my point is that the feature/bug is there solely for
backwards compatibility with g77. A POLA issue back when
gfortran first replaced g77 in GCC. Just last week in
c.l.f there was a long thread from someone who could not
use gfortran to build his legacy code, because gfortran
does not support a number of g77's old -fugly-* options.
In hindsight, I now regret contributing a number of patches
to implement g77 compatibility and common vendor extensions.
In fact, I think the default should be -std=f95+f2003+f2008.
If the feature isn't in one of the standards, an error should
be issued without an explicit option to permit the feature.
Unfortrunately, the horse left the barn years ago.