[Bug cobol/119636] compile error: gcobol1 does not find file descriptions in case of obsolete FD phrases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119636 --- Comment #7 from James K. Lowden --- To be clear, ISO is unambiguous. 13.4.5.3 Syntax rules ALL FORMATS 1) File-name-1 shall be specified in a file control entry. With that requirement, tbug.cbl:5:11: error: file name not found is pretty mandated. I am not sure what is being reported. 1. That obsolete syntax is rejected 2. That invalid syntax is rejected 3. That valid syntax (for some compiler) is rejected 4. Something else.
[Bug cobol/119636] compile error: gcobol1 does not find file descriptions in case of obsolete FD phrases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119636 James K. Lowden changed: What|Removed |Added Status|SUSPENDED |ASSIGNED --- Comment #6 from James K. Lowden --- I am reopening this PR as requested, but I don't understand why. Are we saying 003300 DATA DIVISION. 003400 FILE SECTION. 003500 FD TFIL. 004800 01 FREC. 004900 03 RKEY PIC X(8). is valid COBOL that defines a file that cannot be written? I suppose RKEY could be used like Working Storage, like any other data-item.
[Bug cobol/119636] compile error: gcobol1 does not find file descriptions in case of obsolete FD phrases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119636 --- Comment #5 from Simon Sobisch --- Note: While I'm all for cleaning up COBOL code, we do run some programs that still have that in... ignoring (possibly with a warning, but for other compilers you have to enable outputting those) would be much better than missing the FD altogether and error. [but I can cope with that for testing gcobol when falling back to code that's no on production]
[Bug cobol/119636] compile error: gcobol1 does not find file descriptions in case of obsolete FD phrases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119636 --- Comment #4 from Simon Sobisch --- Please reopen as this is not about doing anything with the obsolete code in any way, but ignoring = "parse in the water". The main issue is that the FD is not recognized any more, and yes, there are a lot of existing code bases (MF and others raise a warning "ignored", if you enable those warnings) that have "VALUE OF" and "LABEL RECORDS" in, some also that include "DATA RECORDS". The important stuff is still recognised correctly with other compilers: 003300 DATA DIVISION. 003400 FILE SECTION. 003500 FD TFIL. 004800 01 FREC. 004900 03 RKEY PIC X(8). while gcobol 15.1 complains about the missing FD definition for TFIL.
[Bug cobol/119636] compile error: gcobol1 does not find file descriptions in case of obsolete FD phrases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119636 James K. Lowden changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jklowden at gcc dot gnu.org Last reconfirmed||2025-05-19 Status|UNCONFIRMED |SUSPENDED Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #3 from James K. Lowden --- GCC COBOL makes no claim to support features that were obsolete 40 years ago, when CCVS/85 was codified. Whether or not it should do so is a value judgement. Without real code to test against, any effort to add that support would be provisional at best. The user with working code in need of CCVS/85 features labelled OBSOLETE is invited to file an issue here. We would welcome the challenge.
[Bug cobol/119636] compile error: gcobol1 does not find file descriptions in case of obsolete FD phrases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119636 --- Comment #2 from Robert Dubner --- (In reply to Robert Dubner from comment #1) > The revised code will be based on passing pointers to lists of integers. > > Those lists of integers are being established as static arrays of type > integer_type_node with constructors using > build_int_cst_type(integer_type_node,) to set each element. > > It is my belief that just doing that will address most of the concerns > raised here. Sorry. This went to the wrong PR. I get confused by the automatic march to the next bug.
[Bug cobol/119636] compile error: gcobol1 does not find file descriptions in case of obsolete FD phrases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119636 Robert Dubner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rdubner at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Robert Dubner --- The revised code will be based on passing pointers to lists of integers. Those lists of integers are being established as static arrays of type integer_type_node with constructors using build_int_cst_type(integer_type_node,) to set each element. It is my belief that just doing that will address most of the concerns raised here.
