2018-02-14 22:30 GMT+01:00 Janus Weil <ja...@gcc.gnu.org>: > 2018-02-14 22:16 GMT+01:00 Steve Kargl <s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>: >> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 10:10:09PM +0100, Janus Weil wrote: >>> >>> Regtests cleanly on x86_64-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk? >>> >> >> Looks okay to me with two question below. >> >>> Index: gcc/fortran/match.c >>> =================================================================== >>> --- gcc/fortran/match.c (revision 257635) >>> +++ gcc/fortran/match.c (working copy) >>> @@ -6201,9 +6201,10 @@ gfc_match_select_type (void) >>> || CLASS_DATA (expr1)->attr.codimension) >>> && expr1->ref >>> && expr1->ref->type == REF_ARRAY >>> + && expr1->ref->u.ar.type == AR_FULL >>> && expr1->ref->next == NULL); >>> >>> - /* Check for F03:C811. */ >>> + /* Check for F03:C811 (F08:C835). */ >> >> Is there a testcase that causes gfortran to emit >> an error message for violation of F03:C811? If no, >> could you commit one? > > Good point: Yes, there is such a test case, but it does not cover the > case that is fixed with the patch. I have now added this case to > select_type_1.f03, see updated patch in attachment.
I have just committed this updated patch as r257673. Thanks for the review, Steve. Cheers, Janus