On Sat, Mar 03, 2012 at 08:44:56AM +0100, FX wrote: > PR 36044 (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36044) is an > enhancement request for a way to display backtraces from user code. I'm > against adding yet another nonstandard intrinsic for this purpose (which is > how Intel Fortran does it), but I would like to offer the following solution > to the issue, as I think it can be useful in some cases (and the way I > suggest should not be a maintainance burden for us): > > -- export _gfortran_show_backtrace() from libgfortran (instead of it being > an internal function) > -- add documentation on how to call this function from user-code using > BIND(C) > > Patch was bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-apple-darwin11, also tested > with "make info html pdf". OK for trunk? > FX > >
I think that this approach is a mistake. The patch starts us down a slippery slope. Why not export all the nonstandard intrinsics? In additions, the _gfortran_ prefix was used to separate the libgfortran namespace from userspace. Providing a means to circumvent this separation seems to asking for more PR. I would rather see a new intrinsic procedure add to gfortran. The standard does not prevent a vendor from offer additional intrinsic procedures not found in the standard. -- Steve
