------- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-08-21 19:04 ------- > * Will we want a -std=f2008 separate from f2003, or do we consider f2003 an > alias for f2008 (F2008 being, after all, a minor improvement to F2003)?
Who said that it will be a minor change compared to Fortran 2003 [except that it was supposed to be one]? With Co-Arrays and submodules and a couple of other changes I wouldn't claim so. I'm definitely in favour of having -std=f2008, however, I'm not sure it is already time to introduce such features. (I need the vendor intrinsic GAMMA which I want to be compatible to Fortran 2008; currently I don't care of Fortran 2008 nor do I want to promote it, yet.) The current time line of Fortran 2008 is: 2007-12 First working draft available 2008-02 WG5 review of working draft 2008-04 WG5 approval of draft CD [...] 2009-07 Final CD submitted for approval I think we should wait at least for the first working draft until we start with -std=f2008. Only shortly ago (2007-08-13), the BITS type and the macros were (fortunately) dropped which shows that things are still in a flux -- not that I expect LOG_GAMMA and GAMMA to change/disappear esp. as they are compatible with C. The other mentioned intrinsic changes are also unlikely to change [better ask Toon before adding]. We already have a F2008 feature: We allow "CONTAINS" followed by no contained procedure. When we introduce STD_F2008, one should change the error message there. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32980
