[J3] [EXTERNAL] Re: Is this standard compliant

[Ondřej Čertík]

Hi Tom,

On Thu, Feb 3, 2022, at 2:24 PM, Clune, Thomas L. (GSFC-6101) wrote:
> Hi Ondrej,
>
> If it is not too late ... I would encourage you to make the defaults 
> for LFortran to be strict compliance and then add flags to relax that.  
> The existing vendors don't always have that option once they have 
> customers relying on support for incorrect code.  Thus they tend to 
> have "strict" as an option that is off by default.   Maybe you already 
> have "customers" and thus cannot break backwards compatibility.

Thanks for the feedback! No, it's not too late. Until we release version 1.0, we reserve the right to change things. After 1.0 we'll have to be backwards compatible.

We did the parser first, so we just parsed it, since some of the codes we tested on used it. Later we implemented warnings, so we put them for features that are not standard compliant. I should come back and add it for this feature (10.*-1.) as well. 

As you said, even better might be to just give an error message, that would say "it is not standard compliant, but you can enable it with --some-option".

Ondrej