RFC PR31162 missing warning for real do-loops with implicit typed variables

[Jerry DeLisle]

Jerry DeLisle wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> This PR is a bit mis-stated.  The problem here is that we are not giving 
> any warnings if the START, END, or STEP expressions of the DO LOOP are 
> real.
> 
> I have a patch that fixes this by giving these warnings.
> 
> My question is:  Should gfortran issue warnings regardless of flags 
> except the usual -w mechanism or only warn if -std=f95, -std=f2003, or 
> -pedantic.
> 
> IFORT only warns if -stand f95 as an example, otherwise it accepts real 
> values and loop variables.
> 
> Right now gfortran warns "always" if the loop variable is real.
> 
> The implementation difference will be to either use GFC_STD_F95_DEL or 
> GFC_STD_F95_OBS. (I am using gfc_notify_std)
> 
> Comments please.
> 
> Jerry
> 
To be consistent with the standard, I should use GFC_STD_F95_DEL. I am asking 
only because IFORT does it a little different.  If no one feels strongly about 
this I will use GFC_STD_F95_DEL which will give warning normally and error for 
-std=f95.

Jerry