From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id E7CD23858D34; Sun, 12 Sep 2021 19:34:17 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E7CD23858D34
From: "rimvydas.jas at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/102145] TKR mismatches with -pedantic:
 -fallow-argument-mismatch does not degrade errors to warnings
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2021 19:34:17 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.2.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: rimvydas.jas at gmail dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P5
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-102145-4-LSJ2X2lN9U@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-102145-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-102145-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2021 19:34:18 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D102145

--- Comment #7 from Rimvydas (RJ) <rimvydas.jas at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #6)
> Well, that's what it should do!  Argument mismatch has never
> been permitted by any Fortran standard.  So, PEDANTICALLY
> speaking it is an error to allow.
Pedantically it an error to support *any* extension then.

> > Without going into unrelated and even mildly disheartening long paragra=
phs
> > without useful information, most of this started with removal of
> > -Wargument-mismatch option.
>=20
> No, it started when gfortran grew the ability to diagnosis the
> the problem.  It is an error.  gfortran is telling the user
> it is an error.=20=20
Gfortran was able to diagnose most of these before under -Wargument-mismatc=
h.

> No, it is not.  The -fallow-argument-match option was given to
> user to allow them to compile their broken code.  It was decided
> to degrade a error into a warning with this option.  If you then
> use an option that wants to PEDANTIC with respect to the requirements
> of the Fortran 66, 77, 90, 95, 2003, 2008, and 2018 standard, then
> you're going to get an error.
Nobody said -fallow-argument-mismatch should work under say -std=3Df2008 (a=
nd it
is OK if it doesn't).  Users complain about -std=3Dlegacy or -std=3Dgnu beh=
avior
and -pedantic acting like -pedantic-errors when it shouldn't.  All this done
was force users to make haste changes to keep code compiling while disturbi=
ng
sometimes carefully crafted codes or simply splitting units into separate
fortran souces so that compiler "does not see" this information.=