--- Comment #8 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-02 01:19
---
Closing.
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RE
--- Comment #7 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-02 01:03
---
Subject: Bug 39229
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Sep 2 01:03:34 2009
New Revision: 151309
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151309
Log:
2009-09-01 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/39229
--- Comment #6 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-09-01 03:02
---
Subject: Bug 39229
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Tue Sep 1 03:02:07 2009
New Revision: 151258
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=151258
Log:
2009-08-31 Jerry DeLisle
PR fortran/39229
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-25 17:09 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I am inclined to leave this as is because it is a common practice to use
> positions 73 thru 80 for indexing in legacy fixed form code. (Remember those
> punch cards!)
Yes - and that's the
--- Comment #4 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-25 16:46
---
There are two things going on here. First, because of the continuation, the
scanner actually combines the two lines into one line. Secondly, we have code
that deliberately clears the truncation flag because it w
--
jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot
|dot org
--- Comment #3 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-23 19:38 ---
parse.c (next_statement):
816 if (gfc_at_eol ())
817 {
818 if ((gfc_option.warn_line_truncation || gfc_current_form ==
FORM_FREE)
819 && gfc_current_locus.lb
820 && gfc_current_locus.l
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-18 16:41 ---
> I'm not sure if this kind of thing is legal to begin with
Well, the Fortran standard only has:
Free form: "If a line consists entirely of characters of default kind (4.4.4),
it may contain at most 132 characters.
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-02-18 10:20 ---
I think that also happens if one does not have a procedure call but simply have
a succeeding continuation line, e.g.:
print *, min(1,2) [...] some long line
& , 2
And it seems to happen also with fr
