From: Janne Blomqvist <blomqvist.janne@gmail.com>
To: Tobias Burnus <tobias@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Mark Eggleston <mark.eggleston@codethink.co.uk>,
gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
fortran <fortran@gcc.gnu.org>,
Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch, gcc-wwdocs] Update to Fortran changes
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 08:37:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAO9iq9FQ7572UVbT2vMKqaZSseYoXRvfXkawh7hSczjfhwyC9Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <80c1ca72-0c07-9552-09c5-f2dfbfb74e23@codesourcery.com>
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 10:29 AM Tobias Burnus <tobias@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/27/19 8:58 AM, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 1:12 PM Tobias Burnus <tobias@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> >> AUTOMATIC attribute
> > Speaking of which, to avoid confusion maybe we should rename the
> > -f[no-]automatic option to something like -f[no-]save, since the
> > Fortran standard description of an "automatic data object" doesn't
> > really have anything to do with the option, and neither does the
> > option have anything to do specifically with the DEC AUTOMATIC
> > specifier?
>
> While in principle I concur that the naming is bad, I fear this will
> break several makefiles – hence, I am not sure it is worth the trouble –
> and I am declined to say that it isn't.
Yes, of course we can't remove it outright. But we could keep it as a
deprecated alias for -f[no-]save (or whatever it should be called) and
document it as such.
--
Janne Blomqvist
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-27 8:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-26 10:48 Mark Eggleston
2019-11-26 11:33 ` Tobias Burnus
2019-11-26 16:29 ` Mark Eggleston
2019-11-26 18:48 ` Mark Eggleston
2019-11-27 9:03 ` Tobias Burnus
2019-11-27 14:19 ` Mark Eggleston
2019-11-28 23:48 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2019-11-27 8:08 ` Janne Blomqvist
2019-11-27 8:29 ` Tobias Burnus
2019-11-27 8:37 ` Janne Blomqvist [this message]
2019-11-27 17:34 ` Mark Eggleston
2019-11-28 20:12 ` Making things a bit easier (was: [Patch, gcc-wwdocs] Update to Fortran changes) Gerald Pfeifer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAO9iq9FQ7572UVbT2vMKqaZSseYoXRvfXkawh7hSczjfhwyC9Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=blomqvist.janne@gmail.com \
--cc=fortran@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gerald@pfeifer.com \
--cc=mark.eggleston@codethink.co.uk \
--cc=tobias@codesourcery.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).