From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17843 invoked by alias); 20 Apr 2019 16:57:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 17827 invoked by uid 89); 20 Apr 2019 16:57:37 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_NUMSUBJECT autolearn=no version=3.3.1 spammy=CONTAINS, interference, H*i:sk:9E0F69D, H*f:sk:9E0F69D X-HELO: troutmask.apl.washington.edu Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (HELO troutmask.apl.washington.edu) (128.95.76.21) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 20 Apr 2019 16:57:36 +0000 Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x3KGvY9a003353 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 20 Apr 2019 09:57:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x3KGvYmZ003352; Sat, 20 Apr 2019 09:57:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2019 17:21:00 -0000 From: Steve Kargl To: "Dominique =?iso-8859-1?Q?d'Humi=E8res?=" Cc: gfortran , gcc-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/90166 -- check F2018:C1547 Message-ID: <20190420165734.GA3285@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Reply-To: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu References: <9E0F69D4-B2B3-4B76-B112-F493AE5ED045@lps.ens.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <9E0F69D4-B2B3-4B76-B112-F493AE5ED045@lps.ens.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.2 (2019-01-07) X-SW-Source: 2019-04/txt/msg00827.txt.bz2 On Sat, Apr 20, 2019 at 05:38:34PM +0200, Dominique d'Humières wrote: > > The changes in gfortran.dg/submodule_22.f08 look weird: > (1) is the error in the CONTAINS of a SUBMODULE invalid? > From > > * decl.c (in_module_or_interface): New function to check that the > current state is in a module, submodule, or interface. > > it should not, should it? > > (2) left over? > + > +found outside of a module > It's a sequence of run-on errors. The first statement in the original code is rejected with a syntax error. When that happenrs gfc_current_state() is not COMP_MODULE, COMP_SUBMODULE, or COMP_INTERFENCE. The next line has the MODULE prefix, and the new check finds that it occurs outside of MODULE, SUBMODULE, and INTERFERENCE, so a new error occurs. The remaining errors are then found to be bogus assignments. My conclusion, if the first error is fixed, then the run-on errors don't happen. If you rather fix the problems with '! dg-options "-fmax-errors=1"' I'm fine with that. -- Steve