https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93948
--- Comment #3 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> --- On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 09:15:53AM +0000, thenlich at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93948 > > --- Comment #2 from Thomas Henlich <thenlich at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > -fall-intrinsics is a nice workaround, but it also enables more than I want. > It's not a workaround given the wording of the Fortran stanard. A processor is allowed to provide additional intrinsic subprograms not specified in the standard. However, if a program uses the nonstandard subprograms that program is nonconforming. With a -std= option, one is requested conformance to the Fortran standard, which leads to a catch 22. When I introduced -fall-intrinsics, it was suggested that we have -fintrinsics=cotan,sind to allow only cotan and sind to be added to the set in Fortran standard. I did not and still do not see how to do this given the number of nonstandard intrinsics. > > Requiring one of -fdec or -fall-intrinsics, if -std is specified. Is redundant > in the first case. As I stated earlier, I think -fdec-math should go away and these routines would be handled just like, for example, etime().
