--- Comment #12 from paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com
2010-05-24 08:31 ---
Subject: Re: Missing interface not detected in call to
same file function
With -fwhole-file, we get for the short testcase:
../pr36553/pr36553.f90:2.9:
print *, f( (/ 0.0, 1.0/) )
--- Comment #13 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-24 10:44
---
(In reply to comment #12)
With -fwhole-file, we get for the short testcase:
../pr36553/pr36553.f90:2.9:
print *, f( (/ 0.0, 1.0/) )
1
Error: The reference to function 'f' at (1) either needs an
--- Comment #10 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-23 19:06
---
Still an issue with gcc version 4.6.0 20100520 (experimental) (GCC)
Replaced ice-on-invalid with accepts-invalid keyword. The compiler is fine, the
produced binary isn't - there should be no binary.
Smaller
--- Comment #11 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-05-23 22:34
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 31346 ***
--
dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-10 20:50 ---
Dominique, any improvements here with -fwhole-file?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36553
--- Comment #9 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2009-04-10 22:41 ---
Dominique, any improvements here with -fwhole-file?
AFAICT the answer is no: the invalid code in comment #0 is not rejected (see
comment #6 for the kind of expected diagnostic).
I think this PR should be closed as
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-06-18 07:15 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
However, this is not different from 4.3. Using NAG f95, I get:
Warning: line 26: REAL value for INTEGER PARAMETER
Error:Explicit interface required for CHECK_INTEGER4_RANK1 from
