On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:58:41PM +0200, FX wrote: > > I think I appreciate what you are trying to do here. I don't intend to > > sound > > negative here, but if the keyword AUTOMATIC does nothing > > The testcase given is not an example of useful AUTOMATIC. I think it is > meant to be used to oppose an implied SAVE attribute, e.g. a variable with > explicit initialization or the BIND attribute. Indeed, in the case of > implied SAVE by initialization, there it is a little bit more work because > you have to move the initialization to the executable part of the code. But > that’s not impossible.
The automatic_1 test case was only intended to demonstrate that AUTOMATIC has an effect, not a useful one. I don't have the option of being able to rewrite all our source code, so I am trying to make a compiler which mimics some older proprietary ones; I understand that these features may not be useful to someone writing new Fortran code. > > All in all I’m skeptical of adding even more old language extensions with > little demand when we have a hard time filling up gaps in the standard. Each > addition adds to maintainance load, especially as they might not interact > too well with more modern features. (For example coarrays or BIND attribute, > which were not around when AUTOMATIC was in use.) > > I don’t find any request for this feature in the whole bugzilla database. That's understandable. We'll maintain this feature in our own delta. I felt it was in the spirit of open source to offer it in case it was useful. Thanks for taking the time to review it. Jim
