From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lj1-x22b.google.com (mail-lj1-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22b]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C9D43861000 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:45:29 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 1C9D43861000 Received: by mail-lj1-x22b.google.com with SMTP id u21so8206173lja.0 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 13:45:29 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=eJRl9KvE5hAUrkhJMhkmMZCSWMcCmOFadUaI65nUeDs=; b=DCRx54ymDWLZHq781uHTBprNyhF9NV1U1ktGet1Xlk/GPj8sqABHQpF1ys40IDO7ZK vCYB8zW9GsO1hPbKMDXYWSIezCecia6lxZnBSsgnBjxh9D19lfK96aa+RR/BbjsW9XbJ IErZ3taqxQ8JypJzMPlYwNbVhb+ckID7IGeOcEbE4CsUUD07Q8yt+YWr7Ga6E8KVBLuq DCK89KLcWjUz+5xUF/gAql0ElP3l6BB/hhtNPfM6vkemaEyeegeT18KdnewnPwmqc25C nlcA73BeY4rEj1ZPkimAFlboE5OEfSo5CvHFlMP38iqIBw5bm99+YF4qCrAx+tXlpLJj zqXw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532aEaeO3TAyOvgvvk6ToAj6dYt32OpxdnSgVxIvPSLC3Q0zCYKN D00aJ9/T0/uQ9F3glvgiJbRgbqBpm4Z5x3L+gBJD4U1GdfA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJykvXGgFl4IfSXe2QZcqwaCZ8TMap+hgeH1mDbRzP0CdHuCw79UlL0WyTsI1RhVUUsqjSu2vGYECAq+LvajTps= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9f06:: with SMTP id u6mr3937746ljk.194.1610660727371; Thu, 14 Jan 2021 13:45:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Paul Richard Thomas Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:45:15 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Ping: [Patch, fortran] PR96320 - gfortran 8-10 shape mismatch in assumed-length dummy argument character array To: "fortran@gcc.gnu.org" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: fortran@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Fortran mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:45:30 -0000 Ping! On Wed, 6 Jan 2021 at 20:23, Paul Richard Thomas < paul.richard.thomas@gmail.com> wrote: > This patch fixes the problems in comments 23 and 24 of the PR. > > Comment 23 is fixed by the chunk in expr.c. The chunks in decl.c and > resolve.c fix #24. To be quite honest, I am not sure why they were not > needed in the first place! However, the changes don't cause any problems. > Removing the interface bodies causes the expected error cascade. > > Regtests on FC33/x86_64 - OK for master and, after a decent delay 9- and > 10- branches? > > Paul > > Fortran: This patch fixes comments 23 and 24 of PR96320. > > 2021-01-06 Paul Thomas > > gcc/fortran > PR fortran/96320 > * decl.c (gfc_match_modproc): It is not an error to find a > module procedure declaration within a contains block. > * expr.c (gfc_check_vardef_context): Pure procedure result is > assignable. Change 'own_scope' accordingly. > * resolve.c (resolve_typebound_procedure): A procedure that > has the module procedure attribute is almost certainly a > module procedure, whatever its interface. > > gcc/testsuite/ > PR fortran/96320 > * gfortran.dg/module_procedure_5.f90 : New test. > * gfortran.dg/module_procedure_6.f90 : New test. > -- "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein