This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [patch, fortran] Fix PR41235, accepts invalid
- From: Tobias Burnus <burnus at net-b dot de>
- To: fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Daniel Franke <franke dot daniel at gmail dot com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 11:58:38 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patch, fortran] Fix PR41235, accepts invalid
- References: <200912082042.21075.franke.daniel@gmail.com>
On 12/08/2009 08:42 PM, Daniel Franke wrote:
> Attached patch fixes PR41235, functions with non-constant string length as a
> return type require an explicit interface.
>
> No new testcase as this is already included in gfortran.dg/auto_char_len_4.f90
>
> * gfortran.dg/auto_char_len_4.f90: Check for additional error.
>
I am a bit lost. Looking at auto_char_len_4.f90 I fail to see what what
you plan to change there. (The patch didn't include any testsuite
changes.) Additionally, for the test case from the PR a patched gfortran
does not print any error message either. (Assuming that I have correctly
patched my GCC.)
Admittedly, I also have not checked whether "function level1" is already
invalid due to the "character(i) bigfunc" or only with "character(i)
bigfunc; character(1024) bigfunc". NAG only prints an error message if
both are present; for ifort and g95, it is enough for an error message
that only "function level1" is in the file. I do not know ad hoc which
one is correct; one probably can figure it out when reading the standard
or the PR+linked c.l.f thread.
Thanks for looking into the problem!
Tobias