[Bug fortran/37254] Reject valid PROCEDURE statement with implicit interface

2009-06-23 Thread janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-23 07:27 --- Closing. -- janus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug fortran/37254] Reject valid PROCEDURE statement with implicit interface

2009-06-22 Thread janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 21:02 --- Subject: Bug 37254 Author: janus Date: Mon Jun 22 21:02:19 2009 New Revision: 148816 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148816 Log: 2009-06-22 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org PR

[Bug fortran/37254] Reject valid PROCEDURE statement with implicit interface

2009-06-22 Thread janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 21:08 --- r148816 fixes comment #1 and #3. The errors in comment #4 are justified, since subroutines and functions are mixed. So I think this can be closed if there are no further problems. -- janus at gcc dot gnu dot org

[Bug fortran/37254] Reject valid PROCEDURE statement with implicit interface

2009-06-22 Thread janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-06-22 21:28 --- Subject: Bug 37254 Author: janus Date: Mon Jun 22 21:28:34 2009 New Revision: 148817 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=148817 Log: 2009-06-22 Janus Weil ja...@gcc.gnu.org PR

[Bug fortran/37254] Reject valid PROCEDURE statement with implicit interface

2008-11-30 Thread janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-30 12:28 --- I'm not sure the codes in comment #1 and #3 are actually valid, or if gfortran is right to reject them. See also PR33162 comment #9, where Jerry concludes that a similar thing should be rejected (this is

[Bug fortran/37254] Reject valid PROCEDURE statement with implicit interface

2008-11-30 Thread janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-30 17:42 --- Regarding the validity see also http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/5d2154a34072eb72/d9d7f1edde9aaa5b -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37254

[Bug fortran/37254] Reject valid PROCEDURE statement with implicit interface

2008-08-28 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #4 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-08-28 09:33 --- It seems that some attribute(s) is(are) not properly (re)set. The following code module myMod CONTAINS subroutine proc1(arg1, arg2, arg3) integer :: arg1, arg2, arg3 print*, arg1, arg2, arg3, 's ',

[Bug fortran/37254] Reject valid PROCEDURE statement with implicit interface

2008-08-28 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr
--- Comment #5 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2008-08-28 13:05 --- Grepping the sources it seems that the value of ??-intent associated with 'p' is not reset to INTENT_UNKNOWN on p = new_proc. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37254

[Bug fortran/37254] Reject valid PROCEDURE statement with implicit interface

2008-08-27 Thread janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-08-27 19:52 --- Also the following version of Dominique's test case gives the same error, using PROCEDURE statements without the POINTER attribute: real function proc3( arg1 ) integer :: arg1 proc3 = arg1+7 end