I also see FAIL: gfortran.dg/select_type_9.f03 -O (test for errors, line 16) FAIL: gfortran.dg/select_type_9.f03 -O (test for excess errors)
The errors emitted by the test have changed from /opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/select_type_9.f03:16:11: class is (t) ! { dg-error "Double CLASS IS block" } 1 Error: Double CLASS IS block in SELECT TYPE statement at (1) to /opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/select_type_9.f03:16:11: /opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/select_type_9.f03:14:11: class is (t) 2 /opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/select_type_9.f03:16:11: class is (t) ! { dg-error "Double CLASS IS block" } 1 Error: CASE label at (1) overlaps with CASE label at (2) Dominique > Le 22 oct. 2016 à 09:11, Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> > a écrit : > > Hi Dominique, > > Thanks for the heads up! > > I was going to review Andre's patch this morning, so I will clean my > tree, apply it, confirm that it is regression free and then will > generate a compatible version of my patch for PR69834. I strongly > suspect that the core of the patch is OK and that it is the clean-up > element that is failing to apply. > > Best regards > > Paul > > > On 22 October 2016 at 01:04, Dominique d'Humières <domi...@lps.ens.fr> wrote: >> Dear Paul, >> >> If I did not do any mistake, this patch conflicts seriously with Andre’s one >> at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-10/msg00141.html. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Dominique >> > > > > -- > The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits. > > Albert Einstein