This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC 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]

[Bug fortran/25071] dummy argument larger than actual argument


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25071

--- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-01-27 09:16:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Sorry for being 'a bit' late with comments, but IMHO this should be an error
> and not just a warning, because
>
> 2) Other compilers reject it (so we can't argue that we must support this
> common extension)

Well, ifort and pathscale compile w/o warning and g95 with just a warning the
example at:  gfortran.fortran-torture/execute/st_function.f90

Thus, for compare_actual_formal I would make a distinction between:

      /* Special case for character arguments.  For allocatable, pointer
         and assumed-shape dummies, the string length needs to match
         exactly.  */

where I agree that at least for pointer and allocatable an error should be
printed - but probably also for assumed-shape dummies.

And to
      if (actual_size != 0
            && actual_size < formal_size
            && a->expr->ts.type != BT_PROCEDURE)

which can be less problematic and where a warning might be sufficient.


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