public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/30875] Equivalence of derived types with (same) default initializer
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 23:39:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070317233900.17095.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-30875-6642@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>



------- Comment #2 from brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-03-17 23:39 -------
At the end of 14.6.3.3, "Default initialization may be specified for a storage
unit that is storage associated provided the objects or subobjects supplying
the default initialization are of the same type and type parameters, and supply
the same value for the storage unit."

It is somewhat unclear to me from that language whether the relevant constraint
is that A1 and A2 would have to have the "same type and type parameters" (which
they do not, making the code illegal), or whether A1%I and A2%I would have to
have the same type and type parameters (which they do, making the code legal). 
I tried to get some further opinions about this on comp.lang.fortran, but
apparently nobody found my question interesting enough to reply to.  :)

I've now found that MR&C describes this condition as being that the components
in question must have the same type and type parameters, which would make this
legal, and I suspect that's the final answer we'll get.  Thus, I'm confirming
the bug; I can certainly reproduce the error message.


-- 

brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |brooks at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
      Known to fail|                            |4.3.0
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2007-03-17 23:39:00
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30875


  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-03-17 23:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-02-20  7:51 [Bug fortran/30875] New: incorrect error message for valid code jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk
2007-02-20 16:39 ` [Bug fortran/30875] Equivalence of derived types with (same) default initializer burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-03-17 23:39 ` brooks at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2007-05-07  8:46 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-11 22:39 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-06-11 22:42 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070317233900.17095.qmail@sourceware.org \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).