On Wednesday 27 April 2011 01:06:26 Steve Kargl wrote:
> > > Index: primary.c
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- primary.c (revision 172974)
> > > +++ primary.c (working copy)
> > > @@ -541,6 +541,17 @@ match_real_constant (gfc_expr **result,
> > >
> > > goto done;
> > >
> > > exp_char = c;
> > >
> > > +
> > > + if (c == 'q')
> > > + {
> > > + if (gfc_notify_std (GFC_STD_GNU, "Extension: exponent-letter 'q'
> > > in " + "real-literal-constant at %C") ==
> > > FAILURE) + return MATCH_ERROR;
> > > + else if (gfc_option.warn_real_q_constant)
> > > + gfc_warning("Extension: exponent-letter 'q' in
> > > real-literal-constant
> >
> > "
> >
> > > + "at %C");
> > > + }
> >
> > I think the above could generate double warnings. With -pedantic for
> > example (but I didn't check).
>
> It's an 'if -- else if' construct. If gfc_notify_std == FAILURE, then
> the error message is issues and the function returns. If it is TRUE,
> then there should be no messages and else if() is tested.
My concern is that gfc_notify_std seems to return SUCCESS on warnings (I can't
test right now as make has decided to rebuild the whole middle-end :-(). Then,
I expect double warnings with -pedantic -Wreal-q-constant as -pedantic is a
(the only one ?) case outputing warnings for GNU extensions.
Mikael
