[patch, fortran] PR42354, alternative fix

[Jerry DeLisle]

On 12/13/2009 08:39 AM, Daniel Franke wrote:
>
> Hi all.
>
> The patch for PR42354 I proposed yesterday fixes the problem described in the
> PR, but is not the right approach. Actually, after a lengthy discussion with
> Tobias B. on IRC, we figured out that one should not check for specification
> functions when checking init expressions. Hence, instead of adding a
> workaround to expr.c (check_specification_function), on should remove the call
> of that function in expr.c (check_init_expr) instead. Attached patch does
> this. Other changes adjust a related error message and whitespace.
>
> The remarks on C_SIZEOF still apply.
>
>
> gcc/fortran/:
> 2009-12-13  Daniel Franke<franke.daniel@gmail.com>
>
>          PR fortran/42354
> 	* expr.c (check_init_expr): Do not check for specification functions.
>
> gcc/testsuite/:
> 2009-12-13  Daniel Franke<franke.daniel@gmail.com>
>
>          PR fortran/42354
> 	* gfortran.dg/iso_c_binding_init_expr.f03: New.
> 	* gfortran.dg/intrinsic_std_1.f90: Fixed expected error message.
> 	* gfortran.dg/function_kinds_5.f90: Likewise.
> 	* gfortran.dg/selected_char_kind_3.f90: Likewise.
>
>
> Regression tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk?
>
This is OK.  There are some whitespace issues, spaces instead of tabs that 
should be fixed while you are at it.

Jerry