From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 3733E3858CDA; Fri,  7 Oct 2022 20:10:27 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 3733E3858CDA
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1665173427;
	bh=MYn4W6qXl+hmVs+az9SSzjCjUdl59R4C/LidxWiKJt8=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=GOhdt3BhchofXn86sBvIaBC6FoTh201ZRdSlse+Fmmdc9zeCD/EMqKdIHhIVkg6gm
	 3+Q+5vDkkA3VhNG35W/+M1Rahro2JnfeWwuYQvtxAYPCf+pExUZnTQMghafB9L3TbX
	 4s5gr4YMO76BmCUEElcnT046UB3to3Pi+R17yLsA=
From: "anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/66409] Reporting ambiguous interface when overloading
 assignment with polymorphic array
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2022 20:10:26 +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: 4.9.2
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
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-66409-4-YY1wZfgkSg@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66409-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66409-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D66409

--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #5)
> Both match type "integer", kind "4", rank "0".
>=20
> AFAIK, there is no other consideration than TKR to discern which function
> to call.

Yes, assuming that there is no prioritization (as for non-elemental vs.
elemental).

> Perhaps, someone, who cares about this bug, can point at the language in
> the Fortran standard.

I looked again at F2018 and couldn't find anything.

BTW: Crayftn 13.0.1 says:

module f
       ^=20
ftn-855 crayftn: ERROR F, File =3D pr66409.f90, Line =3D 1, Column =3D 8=20
  The compiler has detected errors in module "F".  No module information fi=
le
will be created for this module.

     module procedure test_f08ts
                      ^=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20
ftn-487 crayftn: ERROR F, File =3D pr66409.f90, Line =3D 6, Column =3D 23=20
  The specific interfaces for "TEST_F08TS" and "TEST_F08" make the GENERIC
interface "TEST" ambiguous.=