------- Comment #13 from sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu 2006-05-05 14:25 ------- Subject: Re: gfortran: intrinsics and std=f95, inconsistency with other compilers
On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 07:09:37AM -0000, anlauf at gmx dot de wrote: > > > ------- Comment #12 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2006-05-05 07:09 ------- > (In reply to comment #11) > > > I've looked at the problem. The -Wall option will set the > > -Wnonstd-intrinsic > > option. This flag appears to trigger a warning when used with -pedantic. > > It does not trigger a warning if you use it with just -std=f95. > > I am getting rather confused now. You're not the only one. :) gfortran is growing a rather large set of options and checking the interaction among them is a pain. > BTW: I just checked -Wnonstd-intrinsics (did not know about it before) > and found that I cannot turn it off by using "-Wno-nonstd-intrinsics". > I guess that this is a bug. I would need to look at options.c to see how the flag is set. I'm surprise that the no- form isn't available. > > > troutmask:sgk[255] gfc4x -std=f95 -fall-intrinsics -Wnonstd-intrinsics -o z > > iargc.f90 > > In file iargc.f90:5 > > > > print *, iargc() > > 1 > > Warning: Intrinsic 'iargc' at (1) is not included in the selected standard > > troutmask:sgk[256] ./z 2 > > > > Any chance that "-std=f95 -Wall -fall-intrinsics" could do the same, > maybe (*cough*) without (*cough*) a warning, needless to say an error? Sure. I can make it do this. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20248
