From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id B324F3858D32; Sun, 7 May 2023 18:41:59 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B324F3858D32 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1683484919; bh=qm0RozHZfAVt3SVY8Vmx83o2CRBtHsM3Yn09QARRi5M=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=LVzsLCBVPgUVrLJnKBROba1teO5rViRdjAwY3p4fln6FsNhfgKr7GalqrtS0iMHgP DDPzpFqL8ZvEQoMkQeq2Ll8hIUWSRvLZocOvL28SJzAM1ZNLabW4Xgu8+/lqyFaKxr 5OIjMBckS+kK7OAh0HVzN2wpKxf1ERmDwPrM6gT4= From: "anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/97122] Spurious FINAL ... must be in the specification part of a MODULE Date: Sun, 07 May 2023 18:41:59 +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: 11.0 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: P4 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D97122 --- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #7) > I haven't had a response from a current member of J3. Bob Corbett, > a former member, believes the code is valid Fortran. Jeff Hammond > notes that Cray Fortran compiled the code. So, we have Cray, Intel > compile the code. NAG and gfortran reject it. I'm not sure if there > are any other compilers with submodule support. Nvidia accepts it too.=