Re: Patch to gfortran PR13742

[Tobias Schlüter <tobias dot schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de>]

Paul Brook wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 May 2004 13:49, Tobias Schlüter wrote:
>
> > Victor Leikehman wrote:
> >
> > > +      if (is_init)
> > > +     gfc_error ("Variables in COMMON block should not"
> > > +              " have initializers"); /* common_bad.f90 */
> > > +      decl = build_common_decl (sym, union_type, is_init);
> >
> > I don't believe this is correct. I didn't find a place where this is
> > explicitly allowed in the standard, but on line 22, page 49 of the
> > (draft) Fortran 95 standard (this is section 5.1 right before 5.1.1) it
> > says:
> > ----
> > The presence of /initialization/ implies that /object-name/ is saved,
> > except for an /object-name/ in a named common block or an /object-name/
> > with the PARAMETER attribute.
> > ----
>
>
> From section 5.5.2.4 "Differences between named common and blank common"
>
> "(3) A data object in a named common block may be initially defined by means 
> of a DATA statement [...] objects in a blank common may not be initially 
> defined."

I have a patch which implements the frontend part of these rules. As 
usual, I will submit this once my copyright assignment is in place.

- Tobi