[Bug fortran/24398] invalid module file gives weird error

2006-11-06 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org


--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-11-06 17:18 ---
Subject: Bug 24398

Author: pault
Date: Mon Nov  6 17:18:03 2006
New Revision: 118522

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=118522
Log:
2006-11-06  Paul Thomas  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


PR fortran/29373
* decl.c (get_proc_name, gfc_match_function_decl): Add
attr.implicit_type to conditions that throw error for
existing explicit interface and that allow new type-
spec to be applied.

PR fortran/29407
* resolve.c (resolve_fl_namelist): Do not check for
namelist/procedure conflict, if the symbol corresponds
to a good local variable declaration.

PR fortran/27701
* decl.c (get_proc_name): Replace the detection of a declared
procedure by the presence of a formal argument list by the
attributes of the symbol and the presence of an explicit
interface.

PR fortran/29232
* resolve.c (resolve_fl_variable): See if the host association
of a derived type is blocked by the presence of another type I
object in the current namespace.

PR fortran/29364
* resolve.c (resolve_fl_derived): Check for the presence of
the derived type for a derived type component.

PR fortran/24398
* module.c (gfc_use_module): Check that the first words in a
module file are 'GFORTRAN module'.

PR fortran/29115
* resolve.c (resolve_structure_cons): It is an error if the
pointer component elements of a derived type constructor are
not pointer or target.

PR fortran/29211
* trans-stmt.c (generate_loop_for_temp_to_lhs,
generate_loop_for_rhs_to_temp): Provide a string length for
the temporary by copying that of the other side of the scalar
assignment.

PR fortran/29098
* resolve.c (resolve_structure_cons): Do not return FAILURE if
component expression is NULL.


2006-11-06  Paul Thomas  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PR fortran/29373
* gfortran.dg/implicit_9.f90: New test.

PR fortran/29407
* gfortran.dg/namelist_25.f90: New test.

PR fortran/27701
* gfortran.dg/same_name_2.f90: New test.

PR fortran/29232
* gfortran.dg/host_assoc_types_1.f90: New test.

PR fortran/29364
* gfortran.dg/missing_derived_type_1.f90: New test.
* gfortran.dg/implicit_actual.f90: Comment out USE GLOBAL.

PR fortran/29115
* gfortran.dg/derived_constructor_comps_2.f90: New test.

PR fortran/29211
* gfortran.dg/forall_char_dependencies_1.f90: New test.

PR fortran/29098
* gfortran.dg/default_initialization_2.f90: New test.

Added:
   
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/default_initialization_2.f90
   
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/derived_constructor_comps_2.f90
   
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/forall_char_dependencies_1.f90
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/host_assoc_types_1.f90
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_9.f90
   
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/missing_derived_type_1.f90
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/namelist_25.f90
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/same_name_2.f90
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/fortran/decl.c
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/fortran/module.c
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/fortran/trans-stmt.c
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_actual.f90


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24398



[Bug fortran/24398] invalid module file gives weird error

2006-10-14 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org


--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-14 08:20 ---
Fixed in trunk

Paul


-- 

pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution||FIXED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24398



[Bug fortran/24398] invalid module file gives weird error

2006-10-13 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org


--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-13 12:51 ---
Subject: Bug 24398

Author: pault
Date: Fri Oct 13 12:51:07 2006
New Revision: 117692

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=117692
Log:
2006-10-13 Paul Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PR fortran/29373
* decl.c (get_proc_name, gfc_match_function_decl): Add
attr.implicit_type to conditions that throw error for
existing explicit interface and that allow new type-
spec to be applied.

PR fortran/29407
* resolve.c (resolve_fl_namelist): Do not check for
namelist/procedure conflict, if the symbol corresponds
to a good local variable declaration.

PR fortran/27701
* decl.c (get_proc_name): Replace the detection of a declared
procedure by the presence of a formal argument list by the
attributes of the symbol and the presence of an explicit
interface.

PR fortran/29232
* resolve.c (resolve_fl_variable): See if the host association
of a derived type is blocked by the presence of another type I
object in the current namespace.

PR fortran/29364
* resolve.c (resolve_fl_derived): Check for the presence of
the derived type for a derived type component.

PR fortran/24398
* module.c (gfc_use_module): Check that the first words in a
module file are 'GFORTRAN module'.

PR fortran/29422
* resolve.c (resolve_transfer): Test functions for suitability
for IO, as well as variables.

PR fortran/29428
* trans-expr.c (gfc_trans_scalar_assign): Remove nullify of
rhs expression.


2006-10-13 Paul Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]

PR fortran/29373
* gfortran.dg/implicit_9.f90: New test.

PR fortran/29407
* gfortran.dg/namelist_25.f90: New test.

PR fortran/27701
* gfortran.dg/same_name_2.f90: New test.

PR fortran/29232
* gfortran.dg/host_assoc_types_1.f90: New test.

PR fortran/29364
* gfortran.dg/missing_derived_type_1.f90: New test.
* gfortran.dg/implicit_actual.f90: Comment out USE GLOBAL.

PR fortran/29422
* gfortran.dg/alloc_comp_constraint_4.f90: New test.

PR fortran/29428
* gfortran.dg/alloc_comp_assign_5.f90: New test.

Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/alloc_comp_assign_5.f90
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/alloc_comp_constraint_4.f90
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/host_assoc_types_1.f90
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_9.f90
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/missing_derived_type_1.f90
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/namelist_25.f90
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/same_name_2.f90
Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/fortran/decl.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/module.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_actual.f90


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24398



[Bug fortran/24398] invalid module file gives weird error

2006-10-05 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org


--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-05 21:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=12388)
 -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12388action=view)
A fix for this PR

This checks for the presence of GFORTRAN module as the first utterances in
the .mod file.  The error message on this not being so is evident in the patch
and is even understandable. *sigh*

Paul


-- 

pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
   |dot org |
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24398



[Bug fortran/24398] invalid module file gives weird error

2006-10-05 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org


--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-06 03:08 ---
Paul,

I read the patch, and think that you can commit it.
gfortran certainly can't recover for a mangled module.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24398



[Bug fortran/24398] invalid module file gives weird error

2005-11-01 Thread tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org


-- 

tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org
   Severity|normal  |enhancement
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever Confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-11-01 19:50:33
   date||
Summary|gfortran tries to parse a   |invalid module file gives
   |comment in a module |weird error


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24398