public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "burnus 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 17:12:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080525171148.25010.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-36325-14773@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
------- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-05-25 17:11 -------
> 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?
Well, regarding the reason: Before interfaces had no EXTERNAL attribute and
those procedures with EXTERNAL attribute had no explicit interface.
That interfaces have the EXTERNAL attribute only needed for procedure pointers.
One could think of not giving the EXTERNAL attribute to procedures declared in
interface bodies and modifying POINTER / the pointer resolution only. I'm not
sure what is cleaner and simpler.
Regarding our questions, Richard Maine (mostly) answered them. See URL in
comment #3.
conf2(external,dimension)
is in any case wrong. It should be:
conflict(external with implicit interface, dimension)
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36325
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-25 17:12 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
2008-05-25 17:12 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
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=20080525171148.25010.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).