From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-215958-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 31954 invoked by alias); 17 Apr 2007 19:04:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 31880 invoked by uid 48); 17 Apr 2007 19:04:13 -0000
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 19:04:00 -0000
Subject: [Bug fortran/31612]  New: -fsyntax-only documentation is not accurate
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
Message-ID: <bug-31612-10259@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
From: "fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2007-04/txt/msg01268.txt.bz2

The doc for -fsyntax-only says "Check the code for syntax errors, but don’t do
anything beyond that." while that option actually does more than that: it
creates module files (the *.mod files).

If we believe it's an intended behaviour, it should be noted in the docs. If we
believe it's not what we want, we should make another -fgenerate-module-files
option and handle both. (we need an option to generate module files, because
it's used by the libgomp build machinery).

Personnaly, I'd go for the second option.


-- 
           Summary: -fsyntax-only documentation is not accurate
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.3.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Keywords: documentation
          Severity: enhancement
          Priority: P3
         Component: fortran
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31612