--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-08 12:31 ---
Subject: Bug 30973
Author: burnus
Date: Thu Mar 8 12:30:58 2007
New Revision: 122696
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=122696
Log:
2007-03-08 Tobias Burnus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-27 17:44 ---
Patch: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-02/msg02134.html
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-02-27 17:46 ---
Subject: Bug number PR30973
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-02/msg02134.html
--
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-26 16:47 ---
I checked: USE foo, ONLY: is syntactically correct.
The problem is that only_flag = 1; and no symbol is in the only-list.
I think one needs to modify module.c's read_module, but I fail quickly to see
were the
--- Comment #2 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-26 16:54 ---
Tobias, the same happens if the MODULE foo contains anything and the ONLY part
actually lists something. I omitted this to keep the testcase short.
Same problem here:
$ cat foo2.f90
MODULE foo
INTEGER :: x
END
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-26 21:36 ---
Tobias, the same happens if the MODULE foo contains anything and the ONLY part
actually lists something. I omitted this to keep the testcase short.
Good news. That means that indicates that my patch does the right
