This is the mail archive of the fortran@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

[Patch, fortran] PR25099 - elemental subroutine argument conformance checking

From: "THOMAS Paul Richard 169137" <paul dot richard dot thomas at cea dot fr>
To: <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr>
Cc: <paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 18:13:57 +0200
Subject: [Patch, fortran] PR25099 - elemental subroutine argument conformance checking

Dominique,

I have reconstructed the conformance checking patch. Here it is:

:ADDPATCH fortran:

The attached patch fixes PR25099 by implementing conformance checking
of the actual arguments of elemental subroutines.

The patch is trivial and the testcase is based on that in the PR, with
the addition of checks on operator assignments. Assumed_size_refs_1.f90
need correcting for one non-conforming subroutine call.

I have added the corrected version of elemental_subroutine_3.f90 but
have not included it in the ChageLog entry, since it is part of the
previous patch.

Regtested on Cygwin_NT/PIV - OK for trunk and 4.1?

Paul

2006-04-21  Paul Thomas  <pault@gcc.gnu.org>

	PR fortran/25099
	* resolve.c (resolve_call): Check conformity of elemental
	subroutine actual arguments.

2006-04-21  Paul Thomas  <pault@gcc.gnu.org>

	PR fortran/25099
	* gfortran.dg/elemental_subroutine_4.f90: New test.
	* gfortran.dg/assumed_size_refs_1.f90: Add error to non-conforming
	call sub (m, x).

Attachment: conform.diff
Description: conform.diff

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Patch, fortran] PR25099 - elemental subroutine argument conformance checking
  - From: Steve Kargl

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]