public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "janus at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/36325] specific or generic INTERFACE implies the EXTERNAL attribute
Date: Sun, 25 May 2008 16:37:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080525163707.31243.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-36325-14773@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>



------- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-05-25 16:37 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> Others testcases (like argument_checking_3.f90) fail because they define lots
> of specific interfaces, but no external implementation for those.

Obviously I got this wrong. The actual reason for these tests failing is that
with my patch all the interfaces acquire the EXTERNAL attribute (which they
didn't have before), and apparently there is no argument checking done for
external procedures. Which leads me to think we should probably implement this
(for the case that the interface is explicit). Or is there any good reason that
this is not done?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36325


  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-05-25 16:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-05-25 13:36 [Bug fortran/36325] New: " jaydub66 at gmail dot com
2008-05-25 14:03 ` [Bug fortran/36325] " jaydub66 at gmail dot com
2008-05-25 14:46 ` jaydub66 at gmail dot com
2008-05-25 15:37 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-05-25 16:37 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2008-05-25 17:12 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-05-25 19:09 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-05-25 19:59 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-05-25 22:33 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-05-26 16:50 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-05-26 18:44 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-05-26 20:34 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-05-28 21:29 ` janus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-05-28 21:38 ` janus 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=20080525163707.31243.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).