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 7A001385DC0F; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 00:39:18 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7A001385DC0F
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1595810358;
 bh=jPQ9we64mtEVKK7WVD0bqofj1QjqJaZ9DQYp2ZlN2bQ=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=ly9sIPn+G3VQsbMsP8LzouwwpsyV4eYJCCidD0R6f1WYzSdRTbtkAj9nfzIKqQZcn
 r6rYHg1fXNe0uUgsb4X+W2biLHmmSrOE7WPsTK9oay+ZHgsZKCOVSf3rBaOvfDq05a
 3XmeKA9McZfhhNGJbqTTngNU24iTDOULnTIimAG4=
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: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 00:39:18 +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: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-96320-4-uCd6ADy3Vc@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: <http://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: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 00:39:18 -0000

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

--- Comment #7 from Damian Rouson <damian at sourceryinstitute dot org> ---
For context, I nearly always put the procedure definition in a submodule.  =
In
this case, I'm attempting to use a tool that needs to parse the code and the
tool doesn't support submodules so I moved the procedure definition into the
module.  The workaround is easy: I just eliminate the interface and put all=
 the
argument declarations in the procedure definition.  So this is not an impor=
tant
bug for me.  It just cost me some time to figure out what the problem was.=