http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51268
--- Comment #6 from Sebastien Bardeau <bardeau at iram dot fr> 2011-11-24 13:23:18 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > It should be buried in "16 Scope, association, and definition", but I need > some > time to extract it. Ok, so did I. Here is what I can read section 16.2, p.406 (shortened): "Within a scoping unit, identifiers of entities in the following classes: (1) ..., abstract interfaces, generic interfaces, ... are local identifiers in that scoping unit. Within a scoping unit, a local identifier of an entity of class (1) shall not be the same as a global identifier used in that scoping unit." There is no explicit rule regarding the "specific interfaces" which we are interested in since the beginning. Furthermore, section 12.3.2.1, p.260 + corrigendum 5: "A procedure shall not have more than one explicit specific interface in a given scoping unit, except that if the interface is accessed by use association, there may be more than one local name for the procedure". As far as I understand, specific interface names accessed by use-association do not conflict with the procedure name itself. Isn't it a key point in our discussion? > You could also ask at the comp.lang.fortran newsgroup where > (among others) the editor of the Fortran 2003 standard answers such questions. Yes it will be interesting to have their point of view depending on how we finally agree on the standard interpretation. Thanks for your other explanations and examples, I keep them in mind for further discussions, here or on the comp.lang.fortran newsgroup .
