[Patch, fortran] PR51791 - [OOP] Failure to resolve typebound function call with base object in parentheses
Tobias Burnus
burnus@net-b.de
Sun Jan 8 21:32:00 GMT 2012
Dear Paul,
Paul Richard Thomas:
> A question for the standard aficianados: Are there other base object
> expressions that are legal?
I don't think so. (Ignoring RESHAPE, SPREAD etc., cf. PR 47505.)
> Bootstrapped and regtested on FC9/x86_64 - OK for trunk?
OK. Thanks for the patch.
> *************** resolve_ordinary_assign (gfc_code *code,
> *** 9208,9215 ****
> ! gfc_error ("Variable must not be polymorphic in assignment at %L",
> ! &lhs->where);
> --- 9208,9216 ----
> ! gfc_error ("Variable must not be polymorphic in assignment at %L "
> ! "- check that there is a matching specific subroutine "
> ! "for '=' operator",&lhs->where);
I have to admit that I like the initial wording better - with "in
assignment" changed to "in intrinsic assignment". (In F2008, I would
even write: "Nonallocatable variable", but gfortran does not yet support
allocatable with intrinsic assignments.)
(By the way, there is no matching defined assignment - no need for the
users to check whether there is one; they only need to check why there
is none ;-)
Tobias
More information about the Gcc-patches
mailing list