From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25477 invoked by alias); 18 Aug 2011 12:36:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 25388 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Aug 2011 12:36:56 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:36:42 +0000 From: "burnus at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/50071] gfortran does not distinguish labels in different type scoping units Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:45:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: minor X-Bugzilla-Who: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: mikael at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: CC Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-08/txt/msg01582.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50071 Tobias Burnus changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus 2011-08-18 12:36:21 UTC --- Submitted patch by Mikael: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-08/msg00127.html The submitted patch fixes the issue of comment 0 and an issue affecting BLOCK and ASSOCIATE. It does not fix the following two programs, which should be valid and are currently rejected. ! ---------- 1 type t integer :: i end type t goto 1 1 print *, 'Hello' end ! ---------- block goto 1 print *, 'Hello' 1 continue end block 1 continue end Regarding the validity of the latter, I have now asked at J3: http://j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/2011-August/004585.html