Re: [Patch, fortran] PR - Problems with -fwhole-file

[Paul Richard Thomas <paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com>]

Dear All,


> I wonder how to put it into the gfortran invoke.texi manual such that
> users can actually find that their error (might) go away when using
> -std=legacy; as long as -fwhole-file is not the default, that's not a
> problem. But as the goal is to enable it by default ... (As tests have
> shows, errors of this kind are extremely common; usually they are
> written kind of on purpose and work on most systems.)

Indeed - you are right on both points.  I believe that I am still a
good way from enabling this option by default and should ensure that
the manual is updated.
>
>> The next step is to grab the backend_decls for module procedures. ?I
>> am working on this now.

I have been a bit diverted from this - see below.


> OK; however, I wonder whether one should use an enum instead of a magic
> number for the following to make the meaning more obvious

Yes - I'll do it.

> Additionally, as Daniel Franke has pointed out: PR40011 comment 16 still
> gives an ICE.

I spent three hours on this yesterday and am still none the wiser.
With -fwhole-file, the gfc_dt_list gathers a bunch of extra versions
of each derived type; I cannot for the life of me see why and, worse,
do not understand why they are not recognised to be the same.


> I get an ICE in:
> ==17012== Invalid read of size 8
> ==17012== ? ?at 0x4FABF0: resolve_branch (resolve.c:6305)
> ==17012== ? ?by 0x505670: resolve_code (resolve.c:7002)
> ==17012== ? ?by 0x5059AB: gfc_resolve_blocks (resolve.c:6749)

I've added it to the task list.

I will not commit until I have fixed these two problems.

Paul