From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25820 invoked by alias); 7 May 2006 16:46:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 25789 invoked by alias); 7 May 2006 16:46:11 -0000 Date: Sun, 07 May 2006 16:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20060507164611.25788.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug fortran/20460] Nasty extensions that should always warn In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de" 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: 2006-05/txt/msg00674.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #7 from Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de 2006-05-07 16:46 ------- Subject: Re: Nasty extensions that should always warn fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote on Sun, 07 May 2006: > Anyhow, we know have -std=legacy for such features, including REAL DO loop > indices. The remaining question is: do we want to mark REAL array indices as > legacy (there's currently no warning about them in -std=gnu mode)? (we didn't have STD_LEGACY when this PR was opened) I think this would be a good idea. IMO bad Fortran 77 habits can qualify as legacy nowadays. ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20460