extended list of keywords

[JHenneberg]

acc. to. Intel oneAPI Develeoper (p. 2246) for consistency. I left out the vendor specific keywords AUTOMATIC and STATIC.
Probably it is better to switch to a not vendor specific document for refernce for example ISO_1539-1_Fortran_Standart_2018

[gnikit]

Nice job @JHenneberg and thanks for the PR. Don't worry about the unittests I can fix them

[gnikit]

Probably it is better to switch to a not vendor specific document for refernce for example ISO_1539-1_Fortran_Standart_2018

Do you have a link for the doc? From some quick googling I was only able to find this https://j3-fortran.org/doc/year/18/18-007r1.pdf

[JHenneberg]

Probably it is better to switch to a not vendor specific document for refernce for example ISO_1539-1_Fortran_Standart_2018

Do you have a link for the doc? From some quick googling I was only able to find this https://j3-fortran.org/doc/year/18/18-007r1.pdf

Yeah thats the one I got.

Edit: I am willing to update all keywords descriptions to this document if you prefer this approach.

[gnikit]

@JHenneberg I am having a look now to see if the changes would be too many

[gnikit]

The problem with using the standard to update the keywords is that the keyword description is very obscure so we would ultimately have to go back to either GCC or Intel for a concise description

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #88 (91dde5b) into master (008e47c) will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #88      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   84.34%   84.29%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files          11       11              
  Lines        4363     4363              
==========================================
- Hits         3680     3678       -2     
- Misses        683      685       +2     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
fortls/intrinsics.py	91.85% <ø> (ø)
fortls/langserver.py	81.32% <0.00%> (-0.20%)	⬇️

📣 Codecov can now indicate which changes are the most critical in Pull Requests. Learn more

[JHenneberg]

The problem with using the standard to update the keywords is that the keyword description is very obscure so we would ultimately have to go back to either GCC or Intel for a concise description

I am also fine with leaving it for now like this because of the workload. But if I would start from scratch I always would do it vendor inspecific.

[gnikit]

The problem with using the standard to update the keywords is that the keyword description is very obscure so we would ultimately have to go back to either GCC or Intel for a concise description

I am also fine with leaving it for now like this because of the workload. But if I would start from scratch I always would do it vendor inspecific.

I would not say that it is vendor specific. We still look at the standard when updating the keywords, it's a matter of clarity.

This

Specifies that an object is allocatable

is a lot clearer than this

A variable with the ALLOCATABLE attribute is a variable for which space is allocated during execution.

if GCC had an equally easy to access online doc of attributes I would probably use that instead

[gnikit]

Is this done @JHenneberg ?

[JHenneberg]

I have nothing to add.

[gnikit]

Awesome, thanks for all the help. I also read the standard and added (hopefully) all the missing statements.