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