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 6FE69386F446; Sat, 15 Aug 2020 01:59:01 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6FE69386F446
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1597456741;
 bh=OeDCS2g8LXeqvqHjk1X7/wR9HqITC/W7fv5Shcm92qE=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=IFL0XxzdP6gcc9s/zOy6cEk6eWYBYL36cs1/HYVXsIhVdL0o2kYIikiKEfVAnvLfP
 cL/4QrTtaCi9b6ba6YK4NorXZMJXNA1sXFY8Ut/IJbMdTDW9zvqKUVp4QUyQmTSdtB
 uAiV2pJV/G1/OPxOSZh2VgmkvknDcQnUJfDAvTPg=
From: "damian at sourceryinstitute dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/96320] gfortran 8-10 shape mismatch in assumed-length
 dummy argument character array
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2020 01:59:01 +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: 10.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: damian at sourceryinstitute dot org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pault at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-96320-4-EQWA50aHLc@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-96320-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-96320-4@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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2020 01:59:01 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D96320

--- Comment #23 from Damian Rouson <damian at sourceryinstitute dot org> ---
A related issue arises if the procedure in question is a pure function as
demonstrated below.  The code compiles cleanly if either
1. The result-spec is absent and the procedure is renamed new_foo in both t=
he
interface body and in the procedure definition, or
2. The interface body is repeated in the procedure definition instead the
"module procedure" syntax.

=C2=B1 cat pure-shape-mismatch.f90=20
module foobar
  implicit none

  type foo
    integer bar
  end type

  interface
    pure module function create() result(new_foo)
      implicit none
      type(foo) new_foo
    end function
  end interface

contains
  module procedure create
    new_foo%bar =3D 1
  end procedure
end module=20

=C2=B1 gfortran -c pure-shape-mismatch.f90=20
pure-shape-mismatch.f90:17:4:

   17 |     new_foo%bar =3D 1
      |    1
Error: Variable =E2=80=98new_foo=E2=80=99 cannot appear in a variable defin=
ition context
(assignment) at (1) in PURE procedure

=C2=B1 gfortran --version
GNU Fortran (GCC) 11.0.0 20200804 (experimental)=