[gfortran, RFC] A few issues that need a decision

[kamaraju kusumanchi]

> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> PR 38830 / PR 20618 -- Do we want to add "Variable Format Expression", i.e.
> formats like '(<n>I4.0)'
>
> Pros:
>  - It's a legacy features, some compilers support it.
> Cons:
>  - It's a legacy feature
>  - It has questionable semantics
>  - It was submitted for standardization, but rejected
>  - It is not too widely used (we haven't been asked to implement it very
> often)
>  - There are many others way to do this (using format strings, and either
> internal writes or character-by-character manipulation).
>
> Status of other compilers: YES for Intel and Portland, NO for g95
> Opinions so far: all against
>
> What I propose: NO, and add some documentation about alternatives in the
> "Extensions not implemented in GNU Fortran" section of our doc.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
>

I just now saw this email while browsing the archives.  As a user of
gfortran, I would like to give my 2 cents.

This variable format expression feature is also implemented in Sun
Fortran compilers. It is an incredibly useful feature. I have
inherited a huge chunk of Fortran 77 code where the author used this
extensively. It would be nice to see this extension implemented in
gfortran.

Also, are there any scripts out there to transform a legacy code that
uses variable format expressions to a Fortran 90 conforming code?

thanks
raju