This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug fortran/49638] [OOP] length parameter is ignored when overriding type bound character functions with constant length.
- From: "mikael at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 11:15:22 +0000
- Subject: [Bug fortran/49638] [OOP] length parameter is ignored when overriding type bound character functions with constant length.
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-49638-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49638
--- Comment #12 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-08-04 11:14:36 UTC ---
If we are willing to do some simple expression comparisons, here is what I
think should be supported (most common cases):
- constants: this is the minimum
- variables/dummies: for the case len=n
- sub-components: for the case len=derived%char_length_comp
- function calls: for the case len=len(some_char)
- arithmetic operators: for the case len=n+1
So, only missing in your preliminary patch are sub-components and function.
(In reply to comment #9)
> > I don't know however how you will have two corresponding dummy
> > arguments (from different procedures) compare equal.
>
> Well, the patch in comment #7 handles this by just comparing the names of the
> arguments (which have to be the same in overridden procedures, so I this this
> will be enough):
>
> + case EXPR_VARIABLE:
> + if (strcmp (e1->symtree->n.sym->name, e1->symtree->n.sym->name) != 0)
> + return FAILURE;
>
Ah, yes.
>
> gfc_dep_compare_expr relies on a function called 'gfc_are_identical_variables'.
> This really checks for equal symbols, which is too strict for our case here (so
> we may add an extra argument to loosen this restriction?).
Yes, makes sense. Then you have components and functions almost for free.