Re: Support for WEAK attribute, part 2

[Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>]

Hi Rimvydas,

> Attached is part2 patch for weak variables support.

the patch is mostly fine, but there is a minor style issue:

+      if (sym->attr.ext_attr & (1 << EXT_ATTR_WEAK))
+	gfc_error ("Symbol %qs at %L has the WEAK attribute but is a %s",
+		   sym->name, &sym->declared_at, sym->attr.dummy
+		   ? "dummy argument" : "local variable");
+

It is my understanding that this is not translation-friendly.
Please use separate error texts for either case instead.

Do we need to really have that many separate files for all
the tests?  Note that each separate file contributes to the
time developers wait on regtesting to complete.  Some of the
files essentially test only minor variations, like weak-2.f90
and weak-3.f90.

What is the purpose of testcase weak-5.f90?  It's valid
Fortran, the common block /c/ shows in the assembler and
does not interfere with the module variable c.

If you are interested in the interaction of name mangling
and weak declarations, isn't that already done in weak-4.f90?

Also, is it possible to combine weak-6.f90 and weak-7.f90?

Finally, please do not forget to CC patches to gcc-patches@
so that others can see them.

Thanks,
Harald