Hello world,
Once https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2026-June/064145.html
is reviewed and committed, I plan to commit the patch below
to gcc-17/changes.html.
Checked with "tidy -e -q".
Suggestions on better wordings? Is this the canonical way
for links to the gcc options?
Best regards
Thomas
diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-17/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-17/changes.html
index 6f99bb1f9..f4ec340c0 100644
--- a/htdocs/gcc-17/changes.html
+++ b/htdocs/gcc-17/changes.html
@@ -86,6 +86,27 @@ a work-in-progress.</p>
supported. Additionally, the <code>f_c_string</code> intrinsic
has been reimplemented to be more efficient.
</li>
+ <li> The
+ <a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#index-Wunused-but-set-variable";>
+ <code>-Wunused-but-set-variables</code> </a> option is now
+ effecive for Fortran.
+ </li>
+ <li> The new option
+ <a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/Error-and-Warning-Options.html#index-Wundefined-vars";>
+ <code>-Wundefined-vars</code></a> option, enabled
+ by <code>-Wall</code>, warns about variables that are used that
+ have not been defined (i.e. have no value assigned to them).
+ </li>
+ <li>
+ The new options
+ <a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/Error-and-Warning-Options.html#index-Wunused-read";>
+ <code>-Wunused-read</code></a> and
+ <a href="https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/Error-and-Warning-Options.html#index-Wunused-intent-out";>
+ <code>-Wunused-intent-out</code></a>, both
+ enabled by <code>-Wextra</code>,
+ warn about variables in <code>READ</code> statements and variables passed to
+ <code>INTENT(OUT)</code> variables, respectively, whose values are never used.
+ </li>
</ul>
<!-- <h3 id="go">Go</h3> -->
