[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662 Bug 28662 depends on bug 67623, which changed state. Bug 67623 Summary: interaction between cpp and Fortran https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67623 What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662 Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr changed: What|Removed |Added CC||valeryweber at hotmail dot com --- Comment #12 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr --- *** Bug 63413 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662 Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jeff.science at gmail dot com --- Comment #11 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org --- *** Bug 67250 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Related: All source-file reading should go though libcpp, which requires a better white space handling; cf. https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2014-12/msg3.html
[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662 Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||franke.daniel at gmail dot ||com --- Comment #9 from Francois-Xavier Coudert fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-03-03 14:36:27 UTC --- *** Bug 29671 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 06:24 --- For an initial, incomplete patch see: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2008-07/msg00248.html Slighly updated version. Set tradtional to 0 in fortran/cpp.c to enable new features, which will fail if the following (work items) are in you Fortran file: - Spacing needs to be preserved for fixed-form Fortran (currently fails in the test suite) - Check that '...''...' work (seems so) - Problem mentioned in comment 5 * Max linelength option for gfortran and cpp * Fortran/Fixed-form-source Fortran for cpp * Should one use c_lang instead of a flag? Advantage for c_lang: Fortran is a language; advantage for flag: the CPP features can be tuned by c_lang. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662
[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
--- Comment #8 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-06 06:25 --- Created an attachment (id=16029) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16029action=view) libcpp patch (w/o setting traditional = 0 ) Said patch, see comment 7 for TODO items. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662
[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-30 18:06 --- For an initial, incomplete patch see: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2008-07/msg00248.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662
[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-23 19:29 --- Additional point, one needs to take care also of continuation lines of the following kind. This should print Hello Paul and not Hello Hans. #define Paul Hans ! Paul's string print *,'Hello Paul' end -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662
[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-02-08 17:54 --- One big problem which prevents omitting the -traditional-cpp is that comments are not ignored. Another example of this is ! /* which is regarded as the beginning of a C/C++ comment. Thus we should add two modes to CPP, one for fixed-form and one for free-form Fortran code. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662
[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-31 13:03 --- Confirm my bug. See also 29671 (# must be in the first column). -- burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2006-10-31 13:03:00 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662
[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-08-09 18:03 --- One problem without using -tranditional-cpp is that some tokens in C are not tokens in Fortran so you could get the wrong result. This is why -tranditional-cpp is used. There is no standard for Preprocessed Fortran Source at all. -- pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662
[Bug fortran/28662] fpp call of gfortran: -traditional-cpp versus newer macros like #x
--- Comment #2 from tobias dot burnus at physik dot fu-berlin dot de 2006-08-09 18:10 --- One problem without using -tranditional-cpp is that some tokens in C are not tokens in Fortran so you could get the wrong result. This is why -tranditional-cpp is used. I though the -lang-fortran, which is passed (according to gfortran -###), takes care of this? There is no standard for Preprocessed Fortran Source at all. Well, that I assumed. But it is still (somehow) based on ISO C's preprocessor. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28662
