[Patch, Fortran] Check arguments of elemental intrinsic subroutines for conformance

[Daniel Kraft]

Hi,

while working on PR 35681, I looked at the accepts-invalid mentioned by 
FX in comment #1.  In short, the arguments for a call to MVBITS were not 
checked for conformance, and thus a call with differently shaped 
arguments for IN and OUT was accepted.

The problem here is that check_elemental_actual in resolve.c did for 
subroutine calls not look at c->resolved_sym and thus missed this call 
was actually to an elemental procedure, as the elemental-flag is only 
set on resolved_sym during resolution and not on the original symtree. 
This patch fixes it.

For elemental functions, it seems that the conformance check is (also) 
done in check.c and nothing has to be done here for them (it already 
works); it would probably be nicer to do the check for them also only in 
one place and not a second time (?) in check_elemental_actual, but I 
think it's also quite fine as it is now.  This patch is 
regression-testing at the moment, but I don't expect any (did one 
already and fixed the few failures by a simple modification).

Is it ok if no regressions occur?  What do you think, should I commit 
now and work then on the "real" part of PR 35681 or should I try to do 
both in a single larger patch?  I'm fine with both options, although I 
don't expect that there's a significant "dependance" of both problems, 
so seperate patches seem totally fine.

Cheers,
Daniel

-- 
Done:  Arc-Bar-Cav-Rog-Sam-Val-Wiz
To go: Hea-Kni-Mon-Pri-Ran-Tou
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: patch.changelog
URL: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/attachments/20081016/a67c4501/attachment.ksh>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: patch.diff
URL: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/attachments/20081016/a67c4501/attachment-0001.ksh>