https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113904
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
See comment 1 for remaining to-do items.
I also note that the Fortran resolution comes too early - during parsing - as
the following shows:
module m
implicit none
contains
subroutine test
!$omp declare variant (foo) match(user={condition(myTrue)})
!$omp declare variant (bar) match(user={condition(myCond(1).and.myCond(2))})
logical, parameter :: myTrue = .true.
end
subroutine foo; end
subroutine bar; end
logical function myCond(i)
integer :: i
myCond = i < 3
end
end module m
This fails with the complete bogus:
5 | !$omp declare variant (foo) match(user={condition(myTrue)})
| 1
Error: property must be a constant logical expression at (1)
As 'myTrue' is a scalar logical PARAMETER.
The problem is just that this is not known when parsing '!$omp' - for that
reason, Fortran separates parsing and resolution, which the current code does
not handle as it comes way too early.
* * *
Otherwise: It looks as if - except for simple variable names (and probablyalso
for functions calls w/o arguments) - we want to introduce an internal aux
function like:
logical function __m_MOD_test_DV_cond1() result(res)
res = myCond(1).and.myCond(2)
end
which is then called when evaluating the run-time expression.
With header files and, possibly, also C++ modules, we might be able to always
inline the condition - with Fortran modules probably not, such that an aux
function would be needed for the generic case.
