[Bug fortran/55991] New: Support or document "Escape Sequences"

2013-01-15 Thread damage3025 at gmail dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55991



 Bug #: 55991

   Summary: Support or document "Escape Sequences"

Classification: Unclassified

   Product: gcc

   Version: 4.7.2

Status: UNCONFIRMED

  Severity: normal

  Priority: P3

 Component: fortran

AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org

ReportedBy: damage3...@gmail.com





Sun Studio's f77 support an extension called "Escape Sequences".

(P34, FORTRAN 77 Language Reference)



It is very similar to the escape sequences of C-like languages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_sequences_in_C



I definitely hope that GNU Fortran can support this feature also.



In case it is still non-standard and you don't want to support it for any

reasons, can you document it in "Extensions not implemented in GNU Fortran"?



I hope this not a duplicate and thank you in advance.


[Bug fortran/55991] Support or document "Escape Sequences"

2013-01-15 Thread damage3025 at gmail dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55991



--- Comment #3 from damage3025 at gmail dot com 2013-01-15 14:26:29 UTC ---

As I tried with GNU Fortran 4.7.2 and I was trying to output CRLF explicitly.

$ gfortran --version

GNU Fortran (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.7.2-2ubuntu1) 4.7.2

Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.



c this works

  write (u, '(A, $)') char(13)//char(10)

c these don't work

  write (u, '(A, $)') '\r\n'

  write (u, '(A, $)') "\r\n"



And I honestly find no mention of whether this feature is implemented or not in

documentation of GNU Fortran.

http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/



As I said, Sun's f77 documentation say it is an extension, but I have no idea

whether this is already part of newer Fortran standard. (If so you don't have

to mention it in your documentation)


[Bug fortran/55991] Support or document "Escape Sequences"

2013-01-15 Thread damage3025 at gmail dot com


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55991



--- Comment #4 from damage3025 at gmail dot com 2013-01-15 14:28:01 UTC ---

Thank you all and sorry for the invalid bug.