[PATCH PR Fortran/89286] Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

[Steve Kargl]

On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 02:50:47PM +0100, Mark Eggleston wrote:
> The attached patch treats the intrinsic SIGN in the same way as MOD and 
> DIM as it has the same arguments.
> 
> Tested using make -j 8 check-fortran on x86_64
> 
> Conditional compilation using #ifdef __GFC_REAL_16__ has been employed 
> where appropriate in the test cases so should be OK on platforms without 
> REAL(16).
> 
> Change logs:
> 
> gcc/fortran
> 
>      Mark Eggleston  <mark.eggleston@codethink.com>
> 
>  Â Â Â  PR fortran/89286
>  Â Â Â Â Â Â Â  * check.c (gfc_check_sign): Deleted.
>  Â Â Â  * intrinsic.c (add_functions): Call add_sym_2 with gfc_check_a_p
>  Â Â Â  instead of gfc_check_sign for "sign".
>  Â Â Â  * intrinsic.h: Remove declaration of gfc_check_sign.
>  Â Â Â  * iresolve.c (gfc_resolve_sign): Check for largest kind of the actual
>  Â Â Â  arguments and convert the smaller. Set return kind to be the largest.
>  Â Â Â  * simplify.c (gfc_simplify_sign): Use the largest kind of the actual
>  Â Â Â  arguments for return
>  Â Â Â  * intrinsic.texi: Add GNU extension notes for return value to SIGN.
> 
> gcc/testsuite
> 
>  Â Â Â  Mark Eggleston <mark.eggleston@codethink.com>
> 
>  Â Â Â  PR fortran/89240
>  Â Â Â  * gfortran.dg/sign_gnu_extension_1.f90: New test.
>  Â Â Â  * gfortran.dg/sign_gnu_extension_2.f90: New test.
>  Â Â Â  * gfortran.dg/pr78619.f90: Check for "must have" instead of "must be".
> 
> If OK please can someone commit as I do not have the privileges.
> 

We really need to get you commit access to the tree.

I also am not a fan of this type of change.  Having spent the
last few days working on fixing BOZ to conform to F2018, I'm
finding all sorts of undocumented "extensions".  Personally,
I think gfortran should be moving towards the standard by
deprecating of these types of extensions.

-- 
Steve