Re: [Patch, fortran] PR41600 - [OOP] SELECT TYPE with associate-name => exp: Arrays not supported

2012-05-02 Thread Paul Richard Thomas
Dear Tobias, Thanks for completing the review. I should be able to commit tonight. > Thanks for the patch. I think it is OK. > > Regarding: > >> !       if (ref&&  ref->type != REF_ARRAY&&  seen_array) >> !       { >> !         gfc_error ("CLASS selector at %L is an array with CLASS " >> !      

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR41600 - [OOP] SELECT TYPE with associate-name => exp: Arrays not supported

2012-05-01 Thread Tobias Burnus
Dear Paul, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: Find attached a revised patch to fix PR 41600. Thanks for the patch. I think it is OK. Regarding: ! if (ref&& ref->type != REF_ARRAY&& seen_array) ! { ! gfc_error ("CLASS selector at %L is an array with CLASS " !

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR41600 - [OOP] SELECT TYPE with associate-name => exp: Arrays not supported

2012-05-01 Thread Paul Richard Thomas
Dear Tobias, dear all, Please accept my apologies for the long delay in responding to the review. A combination of overwhelming daytime works and a complete failure of my workstation at home have knocked me out for the last six weeks. Find attached a revised patch to fix PR 41600. On Sun, Mar 1

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR41600 - [OOP] SELECT TYPE with associate-name => exp: Arrays not supported

2012-03-18 Thread Tobias Burnus
Dear Paul, thanks for the patch. Paul Richard Thomas wrote: + /* Transfer the selector typespec to the associate name. */ + + copy_ts_from_selector_to_associate (gfc_expr *expr1, gfc_expr *expr2) + { I think it is not obvious which type spec is which. Maybe you could add a "(expr1)" and "(ex

[Patch, fortran] PR41600 - [OOP] SELECT TYPE with associate-name => exp: Arrays not supported

2012-03-18 Thread Paul Richard Thomas
Dear All, Please find attached a fix for PR41600 plus some. It is reasonably straightforward but the following should be noted: (i) gfc_get_vptr_from_expr exploits that seeming fact that tracing back any class expression through TREE_OPERAND 0 eventually gets one back to the class expression. I