From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-432958-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 4330 invoked by alias); 29 Oct 2013 23:06:49 -0000
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
Received: (qmail 4295 invoked by uid 48); 29 Oct 2013 23:06:45 -0000
From: "burnus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/58857] [OOP] CLASS wrongly rejected in BLOCK DATA
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 23:06:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-58857-4-9zDWLYM8wA@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-58857-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-58857-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg02102.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58857

--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
I tried compiling the code of comment 0 with different compilers. Result:
* Cray ftn simply compiled it.
* Portland Group's pgf90 rejected it with the bogus:
  PGF90-S-0155-Polymorphic variable must be a pointer, allocatable, or dummy
  object -  zz
* Intel accepted it but warns:
  remark #7784: Symbol in BLOCK DATA program unit is not in a COMMON block.[ZZ]

(I think it would be useful to have a similar warning as ifort, but that's a
different issue.)


>>From Fortran 2008 (11.3) for BLOCK DATA:

C1116 (R1120) A block-data specification-part shall contain only definitions of
derived-type definitions and ASYNCHRONOUS, BIND, COMMON, DATA, DIMENSION,
EQUIVALENCE, IMPLICIT, INTRINSIC, PARAMETER, POINTER, SAVE, TARGET, USE,
VOLATILE, and type declaration statements.

C1117 (R1120) A type declaration statement in a block-data specification-part
shall not contain ALLOCATABLE, EXTERNAL, or BIND attribute specifiers.