Hi Jerry, Thanks - pushed as r16-7520 with a rather heavily corrected ChangeLog.
Cheers Paul On Sat, 14 Feb 2026 at 19:44, Jerry D <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2/14/26 9:28 AM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: > > Hello All, > > > > This bug allowed direct references by name to PDT instances. It took > > me a long time to have the necessary light bulb moment: The names of > > PDT instances never have to go through the scanner and so are not > > subject to the ministrations of gfc_wide_tolower. Therefore, rendering > > all the letters of the PDT prefix in upper case prevents pdt_types > > from being directly referenced in code. > > > > I took the opportunity to define PDT_TEMPLATE and PDT_TEMPLATE_LEN in > > gfortran.h. > > > > The chunk in resolve.cc is a funny one. I had previously encountered > > the test for assumed LEN parameters in typebound procedure dummies > > (pdt_37.f03) failing due to apparently unrelated changes in the > > frontend. It seems that it is the order of appearance of pdt_templates > > and pdt_types that mattered. The problem is fixed by testing for both, > > as is necessary for this patch to pass regression testing. > > > > Regtests OK with FC43/x86_64. OK for mainline? I will be offline for a > > few weeks from Monday evening and so I will push the patch then if it > > hasn't been reviewed. In the words of Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, > > it is "mostly harmless". > > > > Paul > > OK for mainline Paul, thanks. > > Jerry >
Change.Logs
Description: Binary data
