public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
[not found] <bug-34004-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
@ 2012-08-12 11:22 ` mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-12 12:52 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: mikael at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-08-12 11:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-08-12 11:22:39 UTC ---
The test in comment #0 is accepted and outputs:
$ ./comment_0
1
2
$
Which seems sensible to me.
Close as INVALID?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
[not found] <bug-34004-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2012-08-12 11:22 ` [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2012-08-12 12:52 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-28 16:00 ` janus at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2012-08-12 12:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-08-12 12:52:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> The test in comment #0 is accepted and outputs:
> $ ./comment_0
> 1
> 2
> $
>
> Which seems sensible to me.
Well the program in comment 0 is invalid in Fortran 2003 but valid in Fortran
2008 (cf. quotes in comment 0 and comment 5.)
Thus, we should reject it with -std=f95/f2003 and accept it with -std=f2008 and
later. (Cf. PR 45521)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
[not found] <bug-34004-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2012-08-12 11:22 ` [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-12 12:52 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-04-28 16:00 ` janus at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-28 17:14 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
` (2 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: janus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-04-28 16:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |janus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-28 16:00:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> > The test in comment #0 is accepted and outputs:
> > $ ./comment_0
> > 1
> > 2
> > $
> >
> > Which seems sensible to me.
>
> Well the program in comment 0 is invalid in Fortran 2003 but valid in Fortran
> 2008 (cf. quotes in comment 0 and comment 5.)
>
> Thus, we should reject it with -std=f95/f2003 and accept it with -std=f2008 and
> later. (Cf. PR 45521)
Since F08 allows it and the two interfaces in comment 0 are distinguishable by
"common sense", I would say it's not worth to implement any diagnostics for it.
How about counting this as a "bug in the F03 standard" and closing the PR as
invalid (as suggested by Mikael)?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
[not found] <bug-34004-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2013-04-28 16:00 ` janus at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-04-28 17:14 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2013-04-30 21:48 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-30 21:48 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
5 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2013-04-28 17:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> 2013-04-28 17:14:05 UTC ---
> "Two dummy arguments are distinguishable if neither is a subroutine and neither
> is TKR compatible (5.1.1.2) with the other."
AFAICT this is not a constraint on the compiler to diagnose it.
> How about counting this as a "bug in the F03 standard" and closing the PR as
> invalid (as suggested by Mikael)?
If nobody want to do the changes for a diagnostic under -std=f95/f2003, I think
it should be closed as WONTFIX to better reflect the situation.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
[not found] <bug-34004-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2013-04-30 21:48 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2013-04-30 21:48 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
5 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-04-30 21:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC| |tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-04-30 21:48:03 UTC ---
Fixed. closing.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
[not found] <bug-34004-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2013-04-28 17:14 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
@ 2013-04-30 21:48 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-30 21:48 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
5 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2013-04-30 21:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |NEW
Resolution|FIXED |
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> 2013-04-30 21:48:28 UTC ---
Oopw, wrong PR.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
2007-11-06 14:16 [Bug fortran/34004] New: " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2008-04-17 7:31 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-04-20 7:31 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-04-20 7:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-20 07:31 -------
Note: Fortran 2008 is better in this regard:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/ff402a68a17d2be9
Here is the relevant text from the current draft, 08-007r2.
Reference is sec. 12.4.3.4.5, par. 3.
[Begin quote]
Two dummy arguments are distinguishable if:
* One is a procedure and the other is a data object,
[End of quote]
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
2007-11-06 14:16 [Bug fortran/34004] New: " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2007-12-14 12:33 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2008-04-17 7:31 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-04-20 7:31 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2008-04-17 7:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-17 07:30 -------
More talk about that recently:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/ff402a68a17d2be9/543de4c347caa9d0
This is well described in the last example of C.11.2.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2008-04-17 07:30:31
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
2007-11-06 14:16 [Bug fortran/34004] New: " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-07 11:02 ` [Bug fortran/34004] " pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-08 10:33 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-12-14 12:33 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-04-17 7:31 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-04-20 7:31 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
4 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-12-14 12:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-14 12:33 -------
Related bug: PR 20896 (esp. test case in PR 20896 comment 0).
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
2007-11-06 14:16 [Bug fortran/34004] New: " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-07 11:02 ` [Bug fortran/34004] " pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-08 10:33 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-12-14 12:33 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-11-08 10:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-08 10:32 -------
> "Two dummy arguments are distinguishable if neither is a subroutine and
> neither is TKR compatible (5.1.1.2) with the other."
>
> Does this mean, though, that a subroutine is or is not distinguishable from a
> variable?
This indeed means that for (checking) generic interfaces, a subroutine dummy is
not distinguishable from a variable or function dummy. (And for distinguishing
variables/functions dummies only TKR is used.)
See also
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/18873113b18cd5e9/
and there especially the (first) posts of Craig Dedo and Richard Maine.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
2007-11-06 14:16 [Bug fortran/34004] New: " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
@ 2007-11-07 11:02 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-08 10:33 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org @ 2007-11-07 11:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
------- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-07 11:02 -------
>
> "Two dummy arguments are distinguishable if neither is a subroutine and neither
> is TKR compatible (5.1.1.2) with the other."
Does this mean, though, that a subroutine is or is not distinguishable from a
variable? I can see nothing in the 95 or 2003 that clarifies this question.
Cheers
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-04-30 21:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <bug-34004-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2012-08-12 11:22 ` [Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-08-12 12:52 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-28 16:00 ` janus at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-28 17:14 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2013-04-30 21:48 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
2013-04-30 21:48 ` tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
2007-11-06 14:16 [Bug fortran/34004] New: " burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-07 11:02 ` [Bug fortran/34004] " pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-11-08 10:33 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2007-12-14 12:33 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-04-17 7:31 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
2008-04-20 7:31 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
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).