Hi Paul,
This correspondence touches on something that I was going to raise - how
do we incorporate experimental F202Y features?
I think your suggestion of -std=f202y is good, we can then make
-funsigned depend on that.
Hmm... one thing. I just read
https://wg5-fortran.org/N2201-N2250/N223
On 9/10/24 12:49 AM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
Hi All,
This correspondence touches on something that I was going to raise - how
do we incorporate experimental F202Y features?
I very much suppory this idea and would like to see Thomas and Pauls
patches go in under this option so we do not
The use -std=f202y seems like a reasonable approach to
wall off experimental implementations of proposed changes
to the Fortran standard. Thomas has introduced -funsigned
for this purpose, which I suppose can be thought of a more
fine-grained wall.
BTW, J3 passed 24-136r1.txt, which is marked a
Hi All,
This correspondence touches on something that I was going to raise - how do
we incorporate experimental F202Y features?
The reason that I ask is that Reinhold Bader proposed extensions to the
processing of assumed rank objects, which became a DIN proposal to WG5 -
see attached. It made so
On Mon, Sep 09, 2024 at 12:26:53AM -0700, Damian Rouson wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 7, 2024 at 22:26 Steve Kargl
> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Sep 07, 2024 at 08:17:42PM -0700, Jerry D wrote:
> >
> >
> > I personally would like to see -std=f2023 made the default.
>
> I would absolutely love that too. I’ve lo
On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 10:10 AM Janne Blomqvist
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 8, 2024 at 10:37 PM Harald Anlauf wrote:
> > The default ("-std=gnu") is IMHO *not* a real standard; it merely
> > describes the set of Fortranish-looking stuff (including standard
> > stuff) that is handled by gfortran if no
On Sun, Sep 8, 2024 at 10:37 PM Harald Anlauf wrote:
> The default ("-std=gnu") is IMHO *not* a real standard; it merely
> describes the set of Fortranish-looking stuff (including standard
> stuff) that is handled by gfortran if no -std= is given and then
> gives *no* warning.
>
> A way forward I
On Sat, Sep 7, 2024 at 22:26 Steve Kargl
wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 07, 2024 at 08:17:42PM -0700, Jerry D wrote:
>
>
> I personally would like to see -std=f2023 made the default.
I would absolutely love that too. I’ve lost countless hours chasing down
issues (in other compilers) that didn’t make sta
Am 08.09.24 um 07:25 schrieb Steve Kargl:
On Sat, Sep 07, 2024 at 08:17:42PM -0700, Jerry D wrote:
Steve and others
We continue to run into issues with PRs like this. I would like to close
these out. I completely hate the mechanisms we have for the options. Why?
Because every time I look at
On Sat, Sep 07, 2024 at 08:17:42PM -0700, Jerry D wrote:
> Steve and others
>
> We continue to run into issues with PRs like this. I would like to close
> these out. I completely hate the mechanisms we have for the options. Why?
> Because every time I look at it I have to think it through ten w
Steve and others
We continue to run into issues with PRs like this. I would like to
close these out. I completely hate the mechanisms we have for the
options. Why? Because every time I look at it I have to think it
through ten ways to sunday. It is not straight forward.
What I would like
11 matches
Mail list logo
