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]

procedure versus module name clash


Dear All,

I am in the midst of fixing another interface problem - PR20896.  My
patch breaks interface_7.f90 by generating an extra error, which I
think is correct.  interface_7.f90 is:

! { dg-do compile }
! One of the tests of the patch for PR30068.
!  Taken from the fortran 2003 standard C11.2.
!
! The interface is invalid although it is unambiguous because the
! standard explicitly does not require recursion into the formal
! arguments of procedures that themselves are interface arguments.
!
module x
 INTERFACE BAD9
   SUBROUTINE S9A(X)
     REAL :: X
   END SUBROUTINE S9A
   SUBROUTINE S9B(X)
     INTERFACE
       FUNCTION X(A)
         REAL :: X,A
       END FUNCTION X
     END INTERFACE
   END SUBROUTINE S9B
   SUBROUTINE S9C(X)
     INTERFACE
       FUNCTION X(A)
         REAL :: X
         INTEGER :: A
       END FUNCTION X
     END INTERFACE
   END SUBROUTINE S9C  ! { dg-error "Ambiguous interfaces" }
 END INTERFACE BAD9
end module x

! { dg-final { cleanup-modules "x" } }

The patch is picking up the mismatch between module 'x' and function
'x' in the procedure interfaces.  I think this is correct and I
propose to change the name of the module.  However, I have a niggling
doubt about it and would appreciate your opinions.

Paul


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