Re: [Patch, Fortran, OOP] PR 46313: OOP-ABI issue, ALLOCATE issue, CLASS renaming issue

[Janus Weil <janus@gcc.gnu.org>]

>>> The best option I can currently see is to use leading underscores (as
>>> in "_vtab_main_dt"). This is forbidden in Fortran (cf. F08:R303), but
>>> accepted by the assembler (cf.
>>>
>>> http://sourceware.org/binutils/docs-2.20/as/Symbol-Names.html#Symbol-Names).
>>>
>>> Attached is a patch which does this change. I also added a few macros
>>> in gfortran.h. Ok for trunk after successful regtest?
>
> +static void
> +get_unique_type_string (char *string, gfc_symbol *derived)
> +{
> +  if (derived->module)
> +    sprintf (string, "%s_%s", derived->module, derived->name);
> +  else
> +    sprintf (string, "%s_%s", derived->ns->proc_name->name, derived->name);
> +}
>
> I wonder whether that works for cases like:
>
> * module name == procedure name
> * internal procedures == procedure name / module name.
> * Nested submodules (when implemented)
>
> I assume defining the same-named (and disjunct) DT in a module and
> separately in a subroutine is weird; with internal procedures and submodules
> it will start to get crazy. But shouldn't one do something like
> _proc_<procedure_name> for procedures? A {module/procedure
> name}_internal-proc-name?
>
> Alternatively, one can defer it until a real-world bug report comes (which I
> think is very unlikely).

I also think it's unlikely. And in fact we have enough real-world PRs
to deal with right now, so I would prefer to defer this to some point
in late stage 3 when we have fixed all the worst bugs and start to get
bored ;)

The last patch I sent (leading underscore version) regtested fine btw.
Is it ok if I commit it now and leave the PR open for the corner
cases?

Cheers,
Janus