F2018 C937

F2018 C937

[Steve Kargl]

For those that might care, I draw your attention to

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101951

Good opportunity for a lurker to step forward and
become a gfortran committer.  Otherwise, this patch
will fester in bugzilla the dozen or so other patches
I've attached to PRs.

-- 
Steve

Re: F2018 C937

[Arjen Markus]

Hi Steve,

I am willing to take up this challenge ;), as well as the patch for C949.
It would be my next attempt to get acquainted with the source code (a first
step hopefully to actively contribute).

Regards,

Arjen

Op di 17 aug. 2021 om 21:02 schreef Steve Kargl via Fortran <
fortran@gcc.gnu.org>:

> For those that might care, I draw your attention to
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101951
>
> Good opportunity for a lurker to step forward and
> become a gfortran committer.  Otherwise, this patch
> will fester in bugzilla the dozen or so other patches
> I've attached to PRs.
>
> --
> Steve
>

Re: F2018 C937

[Arjen Markus]

I have applied the patches locally (take care to restore the tabs ;)).
Should I now commit these changes or is there a more formal procedure
involved?

Regards,

Arjen

Op do 19 aug. 2021 om 08:59 schreef Arjen Markus <arjen.markus895@gmail.com
>:

> Hi Steve,
>
> I am willing to take up this challenge ;), as well as the patch for C949.
> It would be my next attempt to get acquainted with the source code (a first
> step hopefully to actively contribute).
>
> Regards,
>
> Arjen
>
> Op di 17 aug. 2021 om 21:02 schreef Steve Kargl via Fortran <
> fortran@gcc.gnu.org>:
>
>> For those that might care, I draw your attention to
>>
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101951
>>
>> Good opportunity for a lurker to step forward and
>> become a gfortran committer.  Otherwise, this patch
>> will fester in bugzilla the dozen or so other patches
>> I've attached to PRs.
>>
>> --
>> Steve
>>
>

Re: F2018 C937

[Steve Kargl]

Arjen,

If this is your first go around with patching gfortran,
I'll suggest running the testsuite (if you haven't, see
step 5. below; if you have see step 6.).  I suspect you
already know much of what I enumerate below, but it may
help others.

With a bug report, the workflow for me is/was

1. Check versions of the standard to determine if it is
   a bug, and what is the expected result.

2. Identify where the problem can be addressed in source.

   For you (or anyone else interested in gfortran development),
   I suspect there a lot of question about how to do this
   step and the structure of the gfortran source code.  I can
   answer some of those questions in follow-up emails.  Send
   them to fortran@ and CC me.

3. Develop patch.
 
   I've done the first 3 steps.  You are now at testing the patch.

4. Build gfortran with the patch.  Assuming a Unix-like system,
   I have gcc/gccx with the source and gcc/objx is the build
   directory.  So, for a first time build on an N cpu system do

   % cd gcc/objx
   % ../gcc/gccx/configure --prefix=$HOME/work/x \
     --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto \
     --enable-bootstrap --disable-nls --enable-checking
   % make -j N-1 bootstrap && make install

   Otherwise,

   % cd gcc/objx
   % make -j N-1 && make install

   This installs everything in $HOME/work/x.

5. Run the testsuite to check for regressions.  If any occur,
   fix regressions or fix the patch. 
   
   % make -j N-1 check-fortran
   % tail gcc/testsuite/gfortran/gfortran.sum

                === gfortran Summary ===

   # of expected passes            58647
   # of expected failures          253
   # of unsupported tests          92
   objx/gcc/gfortran  version 12.0.0 20210816 (experimental) (GCC) 

   With the C937 and C949 patches, I changed "typespec" to
   "type-spec" in nearby unrelated error messages.  Both are
   being used and type-spec matches the standard.  This may
   cause a regression, so one or more testcases may need a change.
   The C937 patch did not cause a regression.  The C949 one
   did.  You'll see a line like

   # of unexpected failures          7

   The file gcc/testsuite/gfortran/gfortran.log contains the
   buildlog, which is huge.  You can find the failures with
   a search for lines containing ^FAIL.
 
6. Prepare ChangeLog. 

   This has changed with git so you'll need to ask Tobias,
   Thomas, Harald, or on the gcc@ list for guidance.

7. Submit patch to fortran@gcc and gcc-patches@gcc asking
   for review.

8. Wait a few days.  Ping fortran@gcc and gcc-patches@gcc.

9. Wait a few days.  Ping fortran@gcc and gcc-patches@gcc.

   As I developed, the original patch and presumably you reviewed
   it for correctness, you can probably skip step 9.

10. Wait a few days.  Commit patch with or without a review.

I do not know if you need any explicit access/permission to
commit a patch.  I iknow very little about git and how it
works.

At this point, you can either backport the patch to release
branches or close the PR.  For me, I always did a backport 
if it was a trivial task.  At some point, HEAD will diverge
sufficiently from a branch, I would then stop backporting.

-- 
steve

On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 05:10:47PM +0200, Arjen Markus wrote:
> I have applied the patches locally (take care to restore the tabs ;)).
> Should I now commit these changes or is there a more formal procedure
> involved?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Arjen
> 
> Op do 19 aug. 2021 om 08:59 schreef Arjen Markus <arjen.markus895@gmail.com
> >:
> 
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > I am willing to take up this challenge ;), as well as the patch for C949.
> > It would be my next attempt to get acquainted with the source code (a first
> > step hopefully to actively contribute).
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Arjen
> >
> > Op di 17 aug. 2021 om 21:02 schreef Steve Kargl via Fortran <
> > fortran@gcc.gnu.org>:
> >
> >> For those that might care, I draw your attention to
> >>
> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101951
> >>
> >> Good opportunity for a lurker to step forward and
> >> become a gfortran committer.  Otherwise, this patch
> >> will fester in bugzilla the dozen or so other patches
> >> I've attached to PRs.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Steve
> >>
> >

-- 
Steve

Re: F2018 C937

[Arjen Markus]

Hi Steve,

thanks for this detailed workflow. I am familiar enough with git to know
that there are myriads of procedures possible ;). Like you said, the first
three steps have been done. I will get working on step 4 and work my way
down the list.

Regards,

Arjen

Op do 19 aug. 2021 om 18:23 schreef Steve Kargl <
sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>:

> Arjen,
>
> If this is your first go around with patching gfortran,
> I'll suggest running the testsuite (if you haven't, see
> step 5. below; if you have see step 6.).  I suspect you
> already know much of what I enumerate below, but it may
> help others.
>
> With a bug report, the workflow for me is/was
>
> 1. Check versions of the standard to determine if it is
>    a bug, and what is the expected result.
>
> 2. Identify where the problem can be addressed in source.
>
>    For you (or anyone else interested in gfortran development),
>    I suspect there a lot of question about how to do this
>    step and the structure of the gfortran source code.  I can
>    answer some of those questions in follow-up emails.  Send
>    them to fortran@ and CC me.
>
> 3. Develop patch.
>
>    I've done the first 3 steps.  You are now at testing the patch.
>
> 4. Build gfortran with the patch.  Assuming a Unix-like system,
>    I have gcc/gccx with the source and gcc/objx is the build
>    directory.  So, for a first time build on an N cpu system do
>
>    % cd gcc/objx
>    % ../gcc/gccx/configure --prefix=$HOME/work/x \
>      --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto \
>      --enable-bootstrap --disable-nls --enable-checking
>    % make -j N-1 bootstrap && make install
>
>    Otherwise,
>
>    % cd gcc/objx
>    % make -j N-1 && make install
>
>    This installs everything in $HOME/work/x.
>
> 5. Run the testsuite to check for regressions.  If any occur,
>    fix regressions or fix the patch.
>
>    % make -j N-1 check-fortran
>    % tail gcc/testsuite/gfortran/gfortran.sum
>
>                 === gfortran Summary ===
>
>    # of expected passes            58647
>    # of expected failures          253
>    # of unsupported tests          92
>    objx/gcc/gfortran  version 12.0.0 20210816 (experimental) (GCC)
>
>    With the C937 and C949 patches, I changed "typespec" to
>    "type-spec" in nearby unrelated error messages.  Both are
>    being used and type-spec matches the standard.  This may
>    cause a regression, so one or more testcases may need a change.
>    The C937 patch did not cause a regression.  The C949 one
>    did.  You'll see a line like
>
>    # of unexpected failures          7
>
>    The file gcc/testsuite/gfortran/gfortran.log contains the
>    buildlog, which is huge.  You can find the failures with
>    a search for lines containing ^FAIL.
>
> 6. Prepare ChangeLog.
>
>    This has changed with git so you'll need to ask Tobias,
>    Thomas, Harald, or on the gcc@ list for guidance.
>
> 7. Submit patch to fortran@gcc and gcc-patches@gcc asking
>    for review.
>
> 8. Wait a few days.  Ping fortran@gcc and gcc-patches@gcc.
>
> 9. Wait a few days.  Ping fortran@gcc and gcc-patches@gcc.
>
>    As I developed, the original patch and presumably you reviewed
>    it for correctness, you can probably skip step 9.
>
> 10. Wait a few days.  Commit patch with or without a review.
>
> I do not know if you need any explicit access/permission to
> commit a patch.  I iknow very little about git and how it
> works.
>
> At this point, you can either backport the patch to release
> branches or close the PR.  For me, I always did a backport
> if it was a trivial task.  At some point, HEAD will diverge
> sufficiently from a branch, I would then stop backporting.
>
> --
> steve
>
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 05:10:47PM +0200, Arjen Markus wrote:
> > I have applied the patches locally (take care to restore the tabs ;)).
> > Should I now commit these changes or is there a more formal procedure
> > involved?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Arjen
> >
> > Op do 19 aug. 2021 om 08:59 schreef Arjen Markus <
> arjen.markus895@gmail.com
> > >:
> >
> > > Hi Steve,
> > >
> > > I am willing to take up this challenge ;), as well as the patch for
> C949.
> > > It would be my next attempt to get acquainted with the source code (a
> first
> > > step hopefully to actively contribute).
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Arjen
> > >
> > > Op di 17 aug. 2021 om 21:02 schreef Steve Kargl via Fortran <
> > > fortran@gcc.gnu.org>:
> > >
> > >> For those that might care, I draw your attention to
> > >>
> > >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101951
> > >>
> > >> Good opportunity for a lurker to step forward and
> > >> become a gfortran committer.  Otherwise, this patch
> > >> will fester in bugzilla the dozen or so other patches
> > >> I've attached to PRs.
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Steve
> > >>
> > >
>
> --
> Steve
>

Re: F2018 C937

[Steve Kargl]

Feel free to ask questions.  I forgot to point to
the contributing page

https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html

At one time, you need to assign copyright to the FSF.
That is no longer required.  Scan the above page for
details.

-- 
steve

On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 08:36:42AM +0200, Arjen Markus wrote:
> Hi Steve,
> 
> thanks for this detailed workflow. I am familiar enough with git to know
> that there are myriads of procedures possible ;). Like you said, the first
> three steps have been done. I will get working on step 4 and work my way
> down the list.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Arjen
> 
> Op do 19 aug. 2021 om 18:23 schreef Steve Kargl <
> sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>:
> 
> > Arjen,
> >
> > If this is your first go around with patching gfortran,
> > I'll suggest running the testsuite (if you haven't, see
> > step 5. below; if you have see step 6.).  I suspect you
> > already know much of what I enumerate below, but it may
> > help others.
> >
> > With a bug report, the workflow for me is/was
> >
> > 1. Check versions of the standard to determine if it is
> >    a bug, and what is the expected result.
> >
> > 2. Identify where the problem can be addressed in source.
> >
> >    For you (or anyone else interested in gfortran development),
> >    I suspect there a lot of question about how to do this
> >    step and the structure of the gfortran source code.  I can
> >    answer some of those questions in follow-up emails.  Send
> >    them to fortran@ and CC me.
> >
> > 3. Develop patch.
> >
> >    I've done the first 3 steps.  You are now at testing the patch.
> >
> > 4. Build gfortran with the patch.  Assuming a Unix-like system,
> >    I have gcc/gccx with the source and gcc/objx is the build
> >    directory.  So, for a first time build on an N cpu system do
> >
> >    % cd gcc/objx
> >    % ../gcc/gccx/configure --prefix=$HOME/work/x \
> >      --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto \
> >      --enable-bootstrap --disable-nls --enable-checking
> >    % make -j N-1 bootstrap && make install
> >
> >    Otherwise,
> >
> >    % cd gcc/objx
> >    % make -j N-1 && make install
> >
> >    This installs everything in $HOME/work/x.
> >
> > 5. Run the testsuite to check for regressions.  If any occur,
> >    fix regressions or fix the patch.
> >
> >    % make -j N-1 check-fortran
> >    % tail gcc/testsuite/gfortran/gfortran.sum
> >
> >                 === gfortran Summary ===
> >
> >    # of expected passes            58647
> >    # of expected failures          253
> >    # of unsupported tests          92
> >    objx/gcc/gfortran  version 12.0.0 20210816 (experimental) (GCC)
> >
> >    With the C937 and C949 patches, I changed "typespec" to
> >    "type-spec" in nearby unrelated error messages.  Both are
> >    being used and type-spec matches the standard.  This may
> >    cause a regression, so one or more testcases may need a change.
> >    The C937 patch did not cause a regression.  The C949 one
> >    did.  You'll see a line like
> >
> >    # of unexpected failures          7
> >
> >    The file gcc/testsuite/gfortran/gfortran.log contains the
> >    buildlog, which is huge.  You can find the failures with
> >    a search for lines containing ^FAIL.
> >
> > 6. Prepare ChangeLog.
> >
> >    This has changed with git so you'll need to ask Tobias,
> >    Thomas, Harald, or on the gcc@ list for guidance.
> >
> > 7. Submit patch to fortran@gcc and gcc-patches@gcc asking
> >    for review.
> >
> > 8. Wait a few days.  Ping fortran@gcc and gcc-patches@gcc.
> >
> > 9. Wait a few days.  Ping fortran@gcc and gcc-patches@gcc.
> >
> >    As I developed, the original patch and presumably you reviewed
> >    it for correctness, you can probably skip step 9.
> >
> > 10. Wait a few days.  Commit patch with or without a review.
> >
> > I do not know if you need any explicit access/permission to
> > commit a patch.  I iknow very little about git and how it
> > works.
> >
> > At this point, you can either backport the patch to release
> > branches or close the PR.  For me, I always did a backport
> > if it was a trivial task.  At some point, HEAD will diverge
> > sufficiently from a branch, I would then stop backporting.
> >
> > --
> > steve
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 05:10:47PM +0200, Arjen Markus wrote:
> > > I have applied the patches locally (take care to restore the tabs ;)).
> > > Should I now commit these changes or is there a more formal procedure
> > > involved?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Arjen
> > >
> > > Op do 19 aug. 2021 om 08:59 schreef Arjen Markus <
> > arjen.markus895@gmail.com
> > > >:
> > >
> > > > Hi Steve,
> > > >
> > > > I am willing to take up this challenge ;), as well as the patch for
> > C949.
> > > > It would be my next attempt to get acquainted with the source code (a
> > first
> > > > step hopefully to actively contribute).
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Arjen
> > > >
> > > > Op di 17 aug. 2021 om 21:02 schreef Steve Kargl via Fortran <
> > > > fortran@gcc.gnu.org>:
> > > >
> > > >> For those that might care, I draw your attention to
> > > >>
> > > >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101951
> > > >>
> > > >> Good opportunity for a lurker to step forward and
> > > >> become a gfortran committer.  Otherwise, this patch
> > > >> will fester in bugzilla the dozen or so other patches
> > > >> I've attached to PRs.
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Steve
> > > >>
> > > >
> >
> > --
> > Steve
> >

-- 
Steve

Re: F2018 C937

[Arjen Markus]

Yes, I already had arranged for that copyright one and a half years ago,
but my first attempts failed (learning curve, real life getting in the way
etc.)

Op vr 20 aug. 2021 om 08:47 schreef Steve Kargl <
sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>:

> Feel free to ask questions.  I forgot to point to
> the contributing page
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html
>
> At one time, you need to assign copyright to the FSF.
> That is no longer required.  Scan the above page for
> details.
>
> --
> steve
>
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 08:36:42AM +0200, Arjen Markus wrote:
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > thanks for this detailed workflow. I am familiar enough with git to know
> > that there are myriads of procedures possible ;). Like you said, the
> first
> > three steps have been done. I will get working on step 4 and work my way
> > down the list.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Arjen
> >
> > Op do 19 aug. 2021 om 18:23 schreef Steve Kargl <
> > sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>:
> >
> > > Arjen,
> > >
> > > If this is your first go around with patching gfortran,
> > > I'll suggest running the testsuite (if you haven't, see
> > > step 5. below; if you have see step 6.).  I suspect you
> > > already know much of what I enumerate below, but it may
> > > help others.
> > >
> > > With a bug report, the workflow for me is/was
> > >
> > > 1. Check versions of the standard to determine if it is
> > >    a bug, and what is the expected result.
> > >
> > > 2. Identify where the problem can be addressed in source.
> > >
> > >    For you (or anyone else interested in gfortran development),
> > >    I suspect there a lot of question about how to do this
> > >    step and the structure of the gfortran source code.  I can
> > >    answer some of those questions in follow-up emails.  Send
> > >    them to fortran@ and CC me.
> > >
> > > 3. Develop patch.
> > >
> > >    I've done the first 3 steps.  You are now at testing the patch.
> > >
> > > 4. Build gfortran with the patch.  Assuming a Unix-like system,
> > >    I have gcc/gccx with the source and gcc/objx is the build
> > >    directory.  So, for a first time build on an N cpu system do
> > >
> > >    % cd gcc/objx
> > >    % ../gcc/gccx/configure --prefix=$HOME/work/x \
> > >      --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,lto \
> > >      --enable-bootstrap --disable-nls --enable-checking
> > >    % make -j N-1 bootstrap && make install
> > >
> > >    Otherwise,
> > >
> > >    % cd gcc/objx
> > >    % make -j N-1 && make install
> > >
> > >    This installs everything in $HOME/work/x.
> > >
> > > 5. Run the testsuite to check for regressions.  If any occur,
> > >    fix regressions or fix the patch.
> > >
> > >    % make -j N-1 check-fortran
> > >    % tail gcc/testsuite/gfortran/gfortran.sum
> > >
> > >                 === gfortran Summary ===
> > >
> > >    # of expected passes            58647
> > >    # of expected failures          253
> > >    # of unsupported tests          92
> > >    objx/gcc/gfortran  version 12.0.0 20210816 (experimental) (GCC)
> > >
> > >    With the C937 and C949 patches, I changed "typespec" to
> > >    "type-spec" in nearby unrelated error messages.  Both are
> > >    being used and type-spec matches the standard.  This may
> > >    cause a regression, so one or more testcases may need a change.
> > >    The C937 patch did not cause a regression.  The C949 one
> > >    did.  You'll see a line like
> > >
> > >    # of unexpected failures          7
> > >
> > >    The file gcc/testsuite/gfortran/gfortran.log contains the
> > >    buildlog, which is huge.  You can find the failures with
> > >    a search for lines containing ^FAIL.
> > >
> > > 6. Prepare ChangeLog.
> > >
> > >    This has changed with git so you'll need to ask Tobias,
> > >    Thomas, Harald, or on the gcc@ list for guidance.
> > >
> > > 7. Submit patch to fortran@gcc and gcc-patches@gcc asking
> > >    for review.
> > >
> > > 8. Wait a few days.  Ping fortran@gcc and gcc-patches@gcc.
> > >
> > > 9. Wait a few days.  Ping fortran@gcc and gcc-patches@gcc.
> > >
> > >    As I developed, the original patch and presumably you reviewed
> > >    it for correctness, you can probably skip step 9.
> > >
> > > 10. Wait a few days.  Commit patch with or without a review.
> > >
> > > I do not know if you need any explicit access/permission to
> > > commit a patch.  I iknow very little about git and how it
> > > works.
> > >
> > > At this point, you can either backport the patch to release
> > > branches or close the PR.  For me, I always did a backport
> > > if it was a trivial task.  At some point, HEAD will diverge
> > > sufficiently from a branch, I would then stop backporting.
> > >
> > > --
> > > steve
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 05:10:47PM +0200, Arjen Markus wrote:
> > > > I have applied the patches locally (take care to restore the tabs
> ;)).
> > > > Should I now commit these changes or is there a more formal procedure
> > > > involved?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Arjen
> > > >
> > > > Op do 19 aug. 2021 om 08:59 schreef Arjen Markus <
> > > arjen.markus895@gmail.com
> > > > >:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Steve,
> > > > >
> > > > > I am willing to take up this challenge ;), as well as the patch for
> > > C949.
> > > > > It would be my next attempt to get acquainted with the source code
> (a
> > > first
> > > > > step hopefully to actively contribute).
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Arjen
> > > > >
> > > > > Op di 17 aug. 2021 om 21:02 schreef Steve Kargl via Fortran <
> > > > > fortran@gcc.gnu.org>:
> > > > >
> > > > >> For those that might care, I draw your attention to
> > > > >>
> > > > >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101951
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Good opportunity for a lurker to step forward and
> > > > >> become a gfortran committer.  Otherwise, this patch
> > > > >> will fester in bugzilla the dozen or so other patches
> > > > >> I've attached to PRs.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> Steve
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Steve
> > >
>
> --
> Steve
>

Re: F2018 C937

[Steve Kargl]

Hi Arjen,

Don't know if you've made any progress with cygwin (yes,
I saw the other thread).  I lurk on the J3 Fortran mailing
list, and have come to learn that C937 has been deleted in
the draft for Fortran 202x.  What this means is that the
"gcc_error ()" statement will need to be changed to use 
the "gfc_notify_std()" method reporting errors.

-- 
steve

On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 08:59:05AM +0200, Arjen Markus wrote:
> Hi Steve,
> 
> I am willing to take up this challenge ;), as well as the patch for C949.
> It would be my next attempt to get acquainted with the source code (a first
> step hopefully to actively contribute).
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Arjen
> 
> Op di 17 aug. 2021 om 21:02 schreef Steve Kargl via Fortran <
> fortran@gcc.gnu.org>:
> 
> > For those that might care, I draw your attention to
> >
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101951
> >
> > Good opportunity for a lurker to step forward and
> > become a gfortran committer.  Otherwise, this patch
> > will fester in bugzilla the dozen or so other patches
> > I've attached to PRs.
> >
> > --
> > Steve
> >

-- 
Steve

Re: F2018 C937

[Arjen Markus]

Hi Steve,

yes, the extra macro did the job, so the testuite has run. So, this means
the patch has to be adapted.

I will report the unexpectedly failing tests in a separate mail.

Regards,

Arjen

Op ma 23 aug. 2021 om 19:18 schreef Steve Kargl <
sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>:

> Hi Arjen,
>
> Don't know if you've made any progress with cygwin (yes,
> I saw the other thread).  I lurk on the J3 Fortran mailing
> list, and have come to learn that C937 has been deleted in
> the draft for Fortran 202x.  What this means is that the
> "gcc_error ()" statement will need to be changed to use
> the "gfc_notify_std()" method reporting errors.
>
> --
> steve
>
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 08:59:05AM +0200, Arjen Markus wrote:
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > I am willing to take up this challenge ;), as well as the patch for C949.
> > It would be my next attempt to get acquainted with the source code (a
> first
> > step hopefully to actively contribute).
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Arjen
> >
> > Op di 17 aug. 2021 om 21:02 schreef Steve Kargl via Fortran <
> > fortran@gcc.gnu.org>:
> >
> > > For those that might care, I draw your attention to
> > >
> > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101951
> > >
> > > Good opportunity for a lurker to step forward and
> > > become a gfortran committer.  Otherwise, this patch
> > > will fester in bugzilla the dozen or so other patches
> > > I've attached to PRs.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Steve
> > >
>
> --
> Steve
>