From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 28033 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2006 21:42:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 28002 invoked by uid 48); 8 Jan 2006 21:42:22 -0000 Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 21:42:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060108214222.28001.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/18540] Jumping into blocks gives error rather than warning In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "tobi 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/msg00760.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #8 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-08 21:42 ------- No, this is not sufficient, because you'll still need to find the label, unless we have some gross code duplication that I'm not aware of. What needs to be done is adding a search through the entire program unit if no matching label is found and GFC_STD_LEGACY is allowed. Since this will take much longer than the original parent block only search, we should really only do this, if need be. I think we also have a bug about slow code with lots of jumps, so it might probably be worthwhile to overhaul this whole thing, to allow searching for statement labels without having to traverse the gfc_code tree. -- tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18540