Dear Janus, > If (2a) is false and (2b) is true, the reference is to the procedure > identified by the appropriate specific > interface in the interface block. This reference shall not be to a > dummy procedure that is not present, > or to a disassociated procedure pointer. >
I also reread this part of the standard and thought that it was rather ambiguous. What determines "appropriate specific interface"? That's why I asked the question. > > To me this sound like a typebound DTIO procedure should indeed behave > differently than a non-typebound one, thus I think what you're > proposing is not necessary. Do you agree? I think that in the circumstances, it is not. Ciao Paul > > Cheers, > Janus > > > > >> On 18 December 2016 at 13:12, Janus Weil <ja...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> the attached patch fixes an ICE on a valid DTIO example, which is in >>> fact a regression of one of my recent patches. See bugzilla for >>> details. >>> >>> Regtests cleanly on x86_64-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Janus >>> >>> >>> 2016-12-18 Janus Weil <ja...@gcc.gnu.org> >>> >>> PR fortran/78848 >>> * trans-io.c (get_dtio_proc): Generate non-typebound DTIO call for class >>> variables, if no typebound DTIO procedure is available. >>> >>> 2016-12-18 Janus Weil <ja...@gcc.gnu.org> >>> >>> PR fortran/78848 >>> * gfortran.dg/dtio_22.f90: New test. >> >> >> >> -- >> If you're walking down the right path and you're willing to keep >> walking, eventually you'll make progress. >> >> Barack Obama -- If you're walking down the right path and you're willing to keep walking, eventually you'll make progress. Barack Obama
