From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-474715-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 5317 invoked by alias); 24 Jan 2015 14:05:02 -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 5263 invoked by uid 48); 24 Jan 2015 14:04:56 -0000
From: "anlauf at gmx dot de" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/64678] Expected association error on dependent associate statements
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2015 14:05:00 -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: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: minor
X-Bugzilla-Who: anlauf at gmx dot de
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-64678-4-YNuEdmAYMO@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-64678-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-64678-4@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: 2015-01/txt/msg02709.txt.bz2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64678

Harald Anlauf <anlauf at gmx dot de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |anlauf at gmx dot de

--- Comment #5 from Harald Anlauf <anlauf at gmx dot de> ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #4)
> > Indeed, that's the easy workaround. I'd have thought the obvious definition
> > for the single multi-associate statement would be to be a shortcut exactly
> > equivalent to nested associates.
> 
> In my mind it was not a workaround. From what I understand (little) of the
> Kargl's comment 1, the two forms should be either rejected or accepted.

I tried NAG, PGI and xlf.  All of them accept the 'nested' version,
but only PGI accepts the original code.

xlf 14:

"pr64678.f90", line 10.22: 1514-091 (S) Invalid structure component reference. 
The object name and all component names (except the rightmost) must be of type
derived.

NAG 6:

NAG Fortran Compiler Release 6.0(Hibiya) Build 1032
Product NPL6A60NA for x86-64 Linux
Copyright 1990-2014 The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd., Oxford, U.K.
f95comp version is Hibiya(6.0) Build 1032
Error: pr64678.f90, line 10: A is not of derived type
       detected at %@MAP

So I think Steve has pointed into the right direction.
Nevertheless, consider posting your code on c.l.f.