[Bug fortran/55282] New: openmp directive and classes

[Bug fortran/55282] New: openmp directive and classes

[valeryweber at hotmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55282

             Bug #: 55282
           Summary: openmp directive and classes
    Classification: Unclassified
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.8.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: fortran
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: valeryweber@hotmail.com


Dear All

The following code doesnt compile at all with the lattest gfortran. 
The problem seems to be in the class definition of the variable "this" 
(works fine while declared as type).

gcc version 4.8.0 20121112 (experimental) (GCC) 

>>>>>
module mod
  use omp_lib
  type :: my_t
     integer :: i
  end type my_t
contains
  subroutine init( this )
    class( my_t ) :: this
!    type( my_t ) :: this
    write(*,*) 'init thread=',omp_get_thread_num()
    this%i=2
  end subroutine init
end module mod
program prog
  use mod
  type( my_t ) :: a
!$omp parallel default( none ) & 
!$omp          private( a ) & 
!$omp          num_threads( 4 )
  call init(a)
!$omp end parallel
end program prog
------
gfortran-trunk prog.f90 -fopenmp
bug.f90: In function ‘prog’:
bug.f90:21:0: error: ‘__vtab_mod_My_t’ not specified in enclosing parallel
   call init(a)
 ^
bug.f90:20:0: error: enclosing parallel
 !$omp          num_threads( 4 )
<<<<<<

Thanks
Valery

[Bug fortran/55282] [OOP] openmp directive and classes

[janus at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55282

janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |janus at gcc dot gnu.org
            Summary|openmp directive and        |[OOP] openmp directive and
                   |classes                     |classes

--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-12 14:35:42 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> The following code doesnt compile at all with the lattest gfortran. 
> The problem seems to be in the class definition of the variable "this" 
> (works fine while declared as type).
>
> [...]
> 
> bug.f90: In function ‘prog’:
> bug.f90:21:0: error: ‘__vtab_mod_My_t’ not specified in enclosing parallel

This is a known problem, see PR 52531.

Note that Fortran 2003 is not supported in OpenMP 3.1. This may change with
OpenMP 4, but I'm not sure of that.

[Bug fortran/55282] [OOP] openmp directive and classes

[janus at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55282

--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-12 14:47:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Note that Fortran 2003 is not supported in OpenMP 3.1. This may change with
> OpenMP 4, but I'm not sure of that.

Just checked: The public RC at http://openmp.org/wp/openmp-specifications/ says
the following:

This OpenMP API specification refers to ISO/IEC 1539-1:2004 as Fortran 2003.
The
following features are not supported:
 * ...
 * Polymorphic entities
 * ...

So, it looks like CLASS declarations are still not allowed in OpenMP 4. Too
bad!

[Bug fortran/55282] [OOP] openmp directive and classes

[valeryweber at hotmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55282

--- Comment #3 from Valery Weber <valeryweber at hotmail dot com> 2012-11-12 19:18:34 UTC ---
Thanks pointing that. Is there any reason for not allowing the classes in
openmp?
I noticed that other compilers (eg ifort, xlf) can accommodate with this
deviation from the standard, is gfortran going in the same direction?

[Bug fortran/55282] [OOP] openmp directive and classes

[kargl at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55282

kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |kargl at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-11-12 20:02:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Thanks pointing that. Is there any reason for not allowing the classes in
> openmp?
> I noticed that other compilers (eg ifort, xlf) can accommodate with this
> deviation from the standard, is gfortran going in the same direction?

Of course there is a good reason.  What if a future OpenMP
standard introduces classes in manner that conflicts with
the way gfortran implements the extension?  gfortran would
then need an option to toggle between the standard conforming
code and the GNU Fortran extension.  Which, then, is the
default?

[Bug fortran/55282] [OOP] openmp directive and classes

[burnus at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55282

Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |burnus at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-11-13 10:44:14 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Note that Fortran 2003 is not supported in OpenMP 3.1. This may change with
> OpenMP 4, but I'm not sure of that.

The OpenMP ARB wasn't as active as I had hoped for, cf. "Fortran 2003" in "1.6
Normative References" in the OpenMP 4.0 RC, available at
http://openmp.org/wp/openmp-specifications/  At a glance, it looks as if almost
none of the Fortran 2003 features have been taken care of.

[Bug fortran/55282] [OOP] openmp directive and classes

[valeryweber at hotmail dot com]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55282

--- Comment #6 from Valery Weber <valeryweber at hotmail dot com> 2012-11-13 16:57:28 UTC ---
Dear All 
I posted a comment on the openmp forum about the f2003 features. Complaining
there may help, who knows?
Valery

[Bug fortran/55282] [OOP] openmp directive and classes

[janus at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55282

janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |DUPLICATE

--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-03-17 17:06:41 UTC ---
resolving as duplicate of PR 52531

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 52531 ***