[Bug fortran/30681] obsolescent vs. obsolete

2007-02-23 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-23 18:17 
---
Subject: Bug 30681

Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Feb 23 18:16:54 2007
New Revision: 122267

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122267
Log:
2007-02-23  Jerry DeLisle  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PR fortran/30681
* options.c (set_default_std_flags): New function to consolidate
setting the flags. Relax warning level for obsolescent.
(gfc_init_options): Use new function.
(gfc_handle_option): Use new function.
* match.c (match_arithmetic_if): Change to obsolescent from deleted.
(gfc_match_if): Same.

Modified:
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/fortran/match.c
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/fortran/options.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30681

[Bug fortran/30681] obsolescent vs. obsolete

2007-02-23 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #9 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-23 18:20 
---
Subject: Bug 30681

Author: jvdelisle
Date: Fri Feb 23 18:20:01 2007
New Revision: 122269

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122269
Log:
2007-02-23  Jerry DeLisle  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PR fortran/30681
* gfortran.dg/pr17229.f: Change Obsolete to Obsolescent.

Modified:
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_2-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr17229.f


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30681

[Bug fortran/30681] obsolescent vs. obsolete

2007-02-23 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-23 18:37 
---
Fixed on 4.2 and 4.3


-- 

jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30681

[Bug fortran/30681] obsolescent vs. obsolete

2007-02-18 Thread patchapp at dberlin dot org 


--- Comment #5 from patchapp at dberlin dot org  2007-02-19 06:30 ---
Subject: Bug number PR30681

A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-02/msg01587.html


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30681

[Bug fortran/30681] obsolescent vs. obsolete

2007-02-18 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-19 06:48 
---
Subject: Bug 30681

Author: jvdelisle
Date: Mon Feb 19 06:48:07 2007
New Revision: 122124

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122124
Log:
2007-02-18  Jerry DeLisle  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PR fortran/30681
* options.c (gfc_init_options): Relax warning level for obsolescent.
* match.c (match_arithmetic_if): Change to obsolescent from deleted.
(gfc_match_if): Same.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/fortran/match.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/options.c


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30681

[Bug fortran/30681] obsolescent vs. obsolete

2007-02-18 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-19 06:52 
---
Subject: Bug 30681

Author: jvdelisle
Date: Mon Feb 19 06:52:18 2007
New Revision: 122125

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122125
Log:
2007-02-18  Jerry DeLisle  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PR fortran/30681
* gfortran.dg/pr17229.f: Change Obsolete to Obsolescent.

Modified:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr17229.f


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30681

[Bug fortran/30681] obsolescent vs. obsolete

2007-02-06 Thread jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #3 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-07 02:10 
---
From the dictionary:  obsolescent - Going out of use; becoming obsolete; 

So this means its not obsolete yet, and thus still supported.

I will fix this.  Splitting hairs really, but what the heck.


-- 

jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot
   |dot org |org
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-02-07 02:10:57
   date||


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30681

[Bug fortran/30681] obsolescent vs. obsolete

2007-02-06 Thread patchapp at dberlin dot org 


--- Comment #4 from patchapp at dberlin dot org  2007-02-07 04:30 ---
Subject: Bug number PR30681

A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-02/msg00597.html


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30681

[Bug fortran/30681] obsolescent vs. obsolete

2007-02-05 Thread vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com 


--- Comment #1 from vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com  2007-02-05 14:05 ---
Compiling the code above with

gfortran -std=f2003 

gives

 In file xarithmetic_if.f90:5

if (i) 10,20,30
  1
Error: Obsolete: arithmetic IF statement at (1)

which is incorrect, because the arithmetic IF is part of standard Fortran 2003
and 95.


-- 

vivekrao4 at yahoo dot com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|obsolescent vs. obsolete|obsolescent vs. obsolete


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30681

[Bug fortran/30681] obsolescent vs. obsolete

2007-02-05 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 


--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-05 16:25 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
 Compiling the code above with
 
 gfortran -std=f2003 
 
 gives
 
  In file xarithmetic_if.f90:5
 
 if (i) 10,20,30
   1
 Error: Obsolete: arithmetic IF statement at (1)
 
 which is incorrect, because the arithmetic IF is part of standard Fortran 2003
 and 95.
 

gfortran is correct.  See section B.2 of Fortran 2003.  I don't have
Fortran 95 handy, but I suspect that gfortran is correct for F95
too.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30681