On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 11:39:51PM +0200, FX wrote: > > 2015-10-16 Steven G. Kargl <ka...@gcc.gnu.org> > > > > PR fortran/67987 > > * decl.c (char_len_param_value): Unwrap unlong line. If LEN < 0, > > then force it to zero pre Fortran Standards. > > * resolve.c (gfc_resolve_substring_charlen): Unwrap unlong line. > > If 'start' is larger than 'end', then length of string is negative, > > so explicitly set it to zero. > > (resolve_charlen): Remove -Wsurprising warning. Update comment to > > text from F2008 standard. > > > > 2015-10-16 Steven G. Kargl <ka...@gcc.gnu.org> > > > > PR fortran/67987 > > * gfortran.dg/char_length_2.f90: Add declaration from PR to testcase. > > The patch is now mostly OK to me. Minor remarks: > > - I???m thinking you mean ???force it to zero per [not pre] Fortran > standards???
yep. Noticed that I was reading the fortran@ message it sent. > - why remove the -Wsurprising warning? it seems a good case for > -Wsurprising: legal code, but dubious anyway > > OK after you ponder that second point. > F90 is over 26 years old. There has been 3 major revisions that have superceded F90 (F95, F03, and F08). All of those revisions include the text that you pointed out to me. Why is it surprising that a compiler conforms to the standard? "Simplify, simplify, simplify." Henry David Thoreau -- Steve
