[Bug fortran/20845] New: error needed

[Bug fortran/20845] New: error needed

[jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk]

The following is non-standard and the compiler should probably generate a
warning/error with '-pedantic -std=f95'

MODULE T1
 TYPE init_type
   integer :: i=1
 END TYPE init_type
 TYPE(init_type) :: x
END MODULE T1
END

-- 
           Summary: error needed
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.1.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: fortran
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk
                CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20845

[Bug fortran/20845] error needed

[fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-04-09 19:19 -------
OK, it took me time to see what was missing here, but the g95 error message is
rather clear:

"Module variable 'x' at (1) with default components must have the SAVE attribute"

Confirmed and marked as minor.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|normal                      |minor
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|                            |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2005-04-09 19:19:56
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20845

[Bug fortran/20845] error needed

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-04-22 14:17 -------
I didn't find anything requiring this in the standard, and it would seem weird,
given that SAVE is implicit in several cases.  See also note 4.27.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20845

[Bug fortran/20845] error needed

[jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk]

------- Additional Comments From jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk  2005-04-23 13:42 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> I didn't find anything requiring this in the standard, and it would seem 
weird,
> given that SAVE is implicit in several cases.  See also note 4.27.

4.4 : 'Unlike explicit initialization, default initialization does not imply 
that the object has the SAVE attribute' 



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20845

[Bug fortran/20845] error needed

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-04-23 13:53 -------
(In reply to comment #3) 
> 4.4 : 'Unlike explicit initialization, default initialization does not imply 
> that the object has the SAVE attribute'

So?  I still don't see why this is invalid.  The error message FX quoted still
doesn't make any more sense to me.  What am I missing?

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20845

[Bug fortran/20845] error needed

[jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk]

------- Additional Comments From jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk  2005-04-23 14:03 -------
(In reply to comment #4)

> doesn't make any more sense to me.  What am I missing?

a constraint in 11.3


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20845

[Bug fortran/20845] error needed

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |accepts-invalid
   Last reconfirmed|2005-04-09 19:19:56         |2005-07-23 02:24:21
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20845