public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug fortran/102638] New: Add warning for implicit save
@ 2021-10-07 13:14 vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com
2021-10-07 13:15 ` [Bug fortran/102638] " vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com
2021-10-07 20:41 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com @ 2021-10-07 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102638
Bug ID: 102638
Summary: Add warning for implicit save
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I request that a -Wimplicit-save option be added and made part of -Wall and
-Wextra. Within a procedure, a declaration such as
integer :: i = 0
would trigger the warning. To silence it, the user would have to write
integer, save :: i = 0
Implicit save is a bad feature of Fortran that often surprises and perplexes
newcomers to the language. Gfortran must implement the standard, but it can
nudge users toward better practices with a -Wimplicit-save option.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/102638] Add warning for implicit save
2021-10-07 13:14 [Bug fortran/102638] New: Add warning for implicit save vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com
@ 2021-10-07 13:15 ` vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com
2021-10-07 20:41 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com @ 2021-10-07 13:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102638
--- Comment #1 from Vivek Rao <vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com> ---
I meant to say that -Wimplicit-save would be part of -Wall *or* -Wextra.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/102638] Add warning for implicit save
2021-10-07 13:14 [Bug fortran/102638] New: Add warning for implicit save vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com
2021-10-07 13:15 ` [Bug fortran/102638] " vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com
@ 2021-10-07 20:41 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-07 20:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102638
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I am opposed to making this part of -Wall. This is about standard
conforming code. If at all, place it under -Wsurprising or -Wextra*.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 57360 ***
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-10-07 20:41 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-10-07 13:14 [Bug fortran/102638] New: Add warning for implicit save vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com
2021-10-07 13:15 ` [Bug fortran/102638] " vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com
2021-10-07 20:41 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).