[Bug fortran/98897] Erroneous procedure attribute for associate name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98897 --- Comment #8 from Damian Rouson --- Thanks, Paul and Tobias!
[Bug fortran/98897] Erroneous procedure attribute for associate name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98897 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added CC||Bader at lrz dot de --- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres --- *** Bug 67744 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/98897] Erroneous procedure attribute for associate name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98897 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED --- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas --- Fixed on 10- and 11-branches. Thanks for the report, Damian. Paul PS See PR99065 for the reason for the delay.
[Bug fortran/98897] Erroneous procedure attribute for associate name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98897 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Paul Thomas : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:9d3b9a3e70e634c7c48bb12bb35ec8219024f98b commit r10-9358-g9d3b9a3e70e634c7c48bb12bb35ec8219024f98b Author: Paul Thomas Date: Thu Feb 11 13:24:50 2021 + Fortran: Fix calls to associate name typebound subroutines [PR98897]. 2021-02-11 Paul Thomas gcc/fortran PR fortran/98897 * match.c (gfc_match_call): Include associate names as possible entities with typebound subroutines. The target needs to be resolved for the type. gcc/testsuite/ PR fortran/98897 * gfortran.dg/typebound_call_32.f90: New test. (cherry picked from commit ff6903288d96aa1d28ae4912b1270985475f3ba8)
[Bug fortran/98897] Erroneous procedure attribute for associate name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98897 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Paul Thomas : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ff6903288d96aa1d28ae4912b1270985475f3ba8 commit r11-7188-gff6903288d96aa1d28ae4912b1270985475f3ba8 Author: Paul Thomas Date: Thu Feb 11 13:24:50 2021 + Fortran: Fix calls to associate name typebound subroutines [PR98897]. 2021-02-11 Paul Thomas gcc/fortran PR fortran/98897 * match.c (gfc_match_call): Include associate names as possible entities with typebound subroutines. The target needs to be resolved for the type. gcc/testsuite/ PR fortran/98897 * gfortran.dg/typebound_call_32.f90: New test.
[Bug fortran/98897] Erroneous procedure attribute for associate name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98897 --- Comment #3 from Damian Rouson --- Thanks for the quick fix, Paul! Any chance of this being back-ported to the 10 branch?
[Bug fortran/98897] Erroneous procedure attribute for associate name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98897 Paul Thomas changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed||2021-02-02 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas --- Created attachment 50114 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=50114=edit Patch for the PR The attached regtests too :-) Thanks for the report, Damian. Paul
[Bug fortran/98897] Erroneous procedure attribute for associate name
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98897
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
match.c's gfc_match_call has:
/* If this is a variable of derived-type, it probably starts a type-bound
procedure call. */
if ((sym->attr.flavor != FL_PROCEDURE
|| gfc_is_function_return_value (sym, gfc_current_ns))
&& (sym->ts.type == BT_DERIVED || sym->ts.type == BT_CLASS))
return match_typebound_call (st);
But here we have:
sym->ts.type == BT_UNKNOWN, sym->attr.flavor == FL_VARIABLE
However, we do have: sym->assoc != NULL && sym->assoc->target != NULL and
'target' has:
expr_type = EXPR_FUNCTION
ts = {type = BT_UNKNOWN
sym->assoc->target->symtree->n.sym
$29 = {name = "output_data_t", module = "output_data_m",
but the rest is also the default value.
Thus, the target needs to be resolved at some point – even when parsing '%' at
some point, the DT needs to be known.
