From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-382531-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 29324 invoked by alias); 4 Feb 2012 11:03:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 29315 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Feb 2012 11:03:12 -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; Sat, 04 Feb 2012 11:02:59 +0000
From: "nagl46 at web dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/52111] [OOP] procedure pointer with polymorphic passed dummy argument
Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2012 11:03:00 -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: nagl46 at web dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-52111-4-LljfRSHsuN@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-52111-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-52111-4@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: 2012-02/txt/msg00465.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52111

--- Comment #4 from alexander tismer <nagl46 at web dot de> 2012-02-04 11:02:55 UTC ---
I think you are right. Thanks again for your helpful annotations.

But I'm not sure if I understand everything correctly.

>> Thus, the compiler is not required to diagnose it - and, seemingly, 
>> the Cray compiler doesn't.

I think I understand this statement. And if I change my code like this:

>>  type(solver_t), target :: solverTarget
>>  integer :: val
>>  class(solverAbstract_t), pointer :: solver
>>
>>  solver => solverTarget
>>
>>  call solver%setPrec('l')
>>  call solver%solve(val)

Then I think program should fail because solveLeft_sub is called with
class(solverAbstract_t) as passed dummy argument. This is not conform with the
subroutine. 
In any case gfortran is right, but compiling my new program with Cray there is
no error. And as you mentionend this is ok, because argument checking is not
necessary. But is it correct that program execution is not stopped by an error?
In my opinion at runtime there is the above mentioned problem.