On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 11:28:06AM +0200, Mikael Morin wrote:
> Le 01/10/2015 18:30, Steve Kargl a écrit :
> > I'm fine with your patch, although I find the error message
> > to be somewhat confusing as no procedure appears in COMMON.
>
> Well, XX is implicitly a procedure.
>
Yes, I understamf what gfortran is doing. However, I
less fluent Fortran programmer who expects XX to be
an array may be confused by error message.
> > The call-stmt in the code is the start of an execution-construct.
> > A common-stmt is not allowed in an execution-construct. At
> > least, that's how I intepret the BNF in 2.1 of F2008.
> >
> The error message appears too soon, before we finish parsing the common
> statement. If it's delayed, as with the following additional patch, the
> common statements is properly rejected:
>
> common_24.f:10:72:
>
> COMMON /FMCOM / XX(80 000 000) ! { dg-error "conflicts with
> COMMON" }
> 1
> Error: Unexpected COMMON statement at (1)
> common_24.f:8:72:
>
> Error: PROCEDURE attribute conflicts with COMMON attribute in ???xx??? at (1)
>
> This needs a little more polishing (location missing in the second error
> message), then let's see how the testsuite likes it.
>
While I prefer the first error message above, if it requires
too much polish, then at least commit your first patch to cure
the ICE. We can worry about polish later.
--
Steve
