From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10688 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2006 00:51:24 -0000 Received: (qmail 10524 invoked by uid 48); 8 Jan 2006 00:51:22 -0000 Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 00:51:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060108005122.10519.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/19292] [meta-bug] g77 features lacking in gfortran In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-01/txt/msg00694.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #12 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-08 00:51 ------- (In reply to comment #11) > As I am clearly no the author the the code, I have no real position to defend. > As my post 25705 makes clear legalistic arguments should be avoided. I also > coded a parallel C program and used f2c on the code fragment posted. In both > cases gcc-4.1.0 emitted object code without complaint. In this respect C and > fortran are both block structured languages without nesting of subroutines. > Therefore, if gcc-4.1.0 can handle it for C a parallel construct should do it > for fortran. C is different than Fortran. I am not clear why you are bring that up at all. Also ICC warns about the code which is why I put in PR 25705 which makes me question the code and if other compiler also warns (or even errors out) about it (by default), it is even more questionable. Also fortran does have nesting of subroutines, I don't get why you said it is not, it is a feature of Fortran 90. You can do something like: function g(f) REAL :: g REAL :: f g = h() contains function h() REAL :: h h = f +1.0 end function end function -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19292