Possible Buglet in gfortran Release 143193 (and 4.3.1 and 4.3.2)

[Tom Browder]

On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Steve Kargl
<sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 08:18:32PM -0600, Tom Browder wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Steve Kargl
>> <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 08:02:45PM -0600, Tom Browder wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 7:25 PM, Steve Kargl
>> ...
>> >> But is that permitted in a Fortran 77 program?  I guess gfortran has
>> >> no check for the f77 standard itself anymore.
>> >
>> > It is not legal in Fortran 77.
>> >
>> > Gfortran is a Fortran 95 compiler with many Fortran 2003 and
>> > 2008 features.  gfortran does not have a -std=f77 mode.  Such
>> > a mode would be a rather questionable step backwards.
>>
>> I know you're correct, alas.
>>
>> Thanks, Steve.  I'll check more closely in my quest before I wave the
>> caution flag.
>>
...
> If you have pgf77, I would think you have pgf90.  To give you a
> rough estimate of the scope of the futile of retrofitting gfortran
> with -std=f77
>
> Fortran 66 --  39 pages
> Fortran 77 -- 243 pages
> Fortran 95 -- 376 pages
> Fortran 03 -- 585 pages
> Fortran 08 -- 555 pages

Whoa, I understand!

Unfortunately, we are trying to maintain backward capability for our
customers who have pgf77 only.  If I can show that gfortran can handle
the customers' needs, we can then wean them from pgf77, move to
gfortran, and gradually start using more modern features of the
language.

In that regard, I'll start another subject on some numerical
differences I've found I hope someone can address.

-Tom