Hi Thomas,

Thanks for that! I think that your one-liner says it all :-)

There are three PRs left open that PR37336 depends on:
PR65347: Is partially fixed. The F2003/8 feature of finalization of a
structure constructor within an array constructor doesn't work. I wonder if
a compile option -finalize-constructors might not be better than
-std=f2003/8?
PR84472: I need to investigate if it is fixed or not. It behaves like one
of the other brands, which complains about a double free. The other brand
does not have this problem. At one stage, I nulled pointer components
before finalization of a function result but removed it because it is not
required by the standard. It might well be a good idea, just on the grounds
that smart-pointers and resource managers seem to be the main real-life use
of finalization and pointer components loom large with them.
PR91316: An impure final call is allowed within a pure procedure at the
moment. Malcolm Cohen convinced me that this should be disallowed.

If the finalization patch has survived a few weeks on mainline without
causing problems, I am inclined to backport to 12-branch. Would that be
acceptable to one and all?

Cheers

Paul


On Sun, 19 Mar 2023 at 08:15, Thomas Koenig via Fortran <fortran@gcc.gnu.org>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> the sentence below seems a bit short for such a huge undertaking,
> but I could not think of anything else to day.
>
> Tested with "tidy -e".
>
> OK for wwwdocs?
>
> Best regards
>
>         Thomas
>
>
> diff --git a/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html b/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html
> index c8d757b6..a4b71ffa 100644
> --- a/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html
> +++ b/htdocs/gcc-13/changes.html
> @@ -373,7 +373,12 @@ a work-in-progress.</p>
>
>   <!-- <h3 id="d">D</h3> -->
>
> -<!-- <h3 id="fortran">Fortran</h3> -->
> +<h3 id="fortran">Fortran</h3>
> +<ul>
> +  <li>
> +    Finalization is now fully supported.
> +  </li>
> +</ul>
>
>   <!-- <h3 id="go">Go</h3> -->
>


-- 
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" -
Albert Einstein