From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <morin-mikael@orange.fr>
Received: from smtp.smtpout.orange.fr (smtp-16.smtpout.orange.fr [80.12.242.16])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BD5C3851406
	for <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2022 11:05:56 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 3BD5C3851406
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=orange.fr
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=orange.fr
Received: from [192.168.1.17] ([86.215.174.255])
	by smtp.orange.fr with ESMTPA
	id iZYZoGNvV94emiZYeo6Zbt; Wed, 12 Oct 2022 13:05:55 +0200
X-ME-Helo: [192.168.1.17]
X-ME-Auth: bW9yaW4tbWlrYWVsQG9yYW5nZS5mcg==
X-ME-Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2022 13:05:55 +0200
X-ME-IP: 86.215.174.255
Message-ID: <93c0f66e-1eeb-3e3d-8345-48c17784e030@orange.fr>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2022 13:05:47 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.3.2
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fortran: check types of operands of arithmetic binary
 operations [PR107217]
To: Harald Anlauf <anlauf@gmx.de>, fortran <fortran@gcc.gnu.org>,
 gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
References: <trinity-820c5571-4877-4f7c-bb95-3c9a5487d6a6-1665519780978@3c-app-gmx-bs49>
Content-Language: fr, en-US
From: Mikael Morin <morin-mikael@orange.fr>
In-Reply-To: <trinity-820c5571-4877-4f7c-bb95-3c9a5487d6a6-1665519780978@3c-app-gmx-bs49>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>

Le 11/10/2022 à 22:23, Harald Anlauf via Fortran a écrit :
> Dear all,
> 
> we need to check that the operands of arithmetic binary operations
> are consistent and of numeric type.
> 
> The PR reported an issue for multiplication ("*"), but we better
> extend this to the other binary operations.
> 
> I chose the following solution:
> - consistent types for +,-,*,/, keeping an internal error if any
>    unhandled type shows up,

I thought it was insufficient for cases where types are consistent but 
invalid, for example:
    print *, [real :: ([.true.])] / [real :: ([.false.])]
but this case is properly caught, and a few other as well, so no problem.

> - numeric types for **
> 
> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.  OK for mainline?
> 
Yes, thanks.