From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-368926-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 12429 invoked by alias); 28 Sep 2011 11:14:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 12419 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Sep 2011 11:14:34 -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; Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:14:20 +0000
From: "janus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/50541] gfortran should not accept a pointer as a generic-name   (r178939)
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:52:00 -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: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: janus at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: janus at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-50541-4-raYarVH5Eh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-50541-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-50541-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-09/txt/msg02103.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50541

--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-09-28 11:14:16 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This one is trivial:

Unfortunately this causes one testsuite regression:

FAIL: gfortran.dg/func_derived_4.f90  -O0  (test for excess errors)


Reduced test case:


module class_field
  implicit none
  interface msh
    module procedure msh
  end interface
contains
  function msh()
    integer, pointer :: msh
  end function
end module


What is special about this, is that the generic and the specific procedure
share the same name. I think the problem is that we only have one symbol for
both, which triggers the conflict.

Possible solutions:
 * (quick'n'dirty) refine the check to only raise a conflict if there is no
specific procedure with the same name 
 * (cleaner but harder) introduce separate symbols for generics (in a separate
symtree), which might also solve our problems with 'constructors' (cf. PR
39427)

For specifics and generics with the same name, see also PR 42418.