http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
--- Comment #9 from Tristan Moody ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #8)
> program foo
> integer i
> external bar, baz
> i=0
> call bar(i)
> call baz(i)
> end
>
> This is standard conforming Fortran. When gfortran compiles
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
--- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl ---
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 06:17:42PM +, tristanmoody at gmail dot com wrote:
> (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #5)
> > The Fortran code conforms to the Fortran standard! Why do you continue to
> > claim
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
--- Comment #7 from Tristan Moody ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #5)
> The Fortran code conforms to the Fortran standard! Why do you continue to
> claim that it is nonconforming invalid code. What the linker does to
> the object code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|INVALID |WONTFIX
--- Comment #6 from Andrew Pinski
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
--- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl ---
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 03:41:13PM +, tristanmoody at gmail dot com wrote:
>
> I concede this point: the standard only specifies that the compiler catch
> nonconforming code within individual program units
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
--- Comment #2 from Tristan Moody ---
Of course the code is invalid. That's the point. The compiler is
inconsistent about whether it will catch that fact. This invalid code could
easily show up, say, when refactoring a large code base, converting
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61069
--- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Your code is invalid and the compiler can do anything. Note that if you type
bar as you should, gfortran complains:
! { dg-do compile }
program foo
implicit none
integer :: i, bar
external bar, b
