[Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #9) How about counting this as a bug in the F03 standard and closing the PR as invalid (as suggested by Mikael)? If nobody want to do the changes for a diagnostic under -std=f95/f2003, I think it should be closed as WONTFIX to better reflect the situation. Doing so.
[Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004 Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #10 from Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-30 21:48:03 UTC --- Fixed. closing.
[Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004 Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW Resolution|FIXED | --- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-30 21:48:28 UTC --- Oopw, wrong PR.
[Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-04-28 16:00:48 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) The test in comment #0 is accepted and outputs: $ ./comment_0 1 2 $ Which seems sensible to me. Well the program in comment 0 is invalid in Fortran 2003 but valid in Fortran 2008 (cf. quotes in comment 0 and comment 5.) Thus, we should reject it with -std=f95/f2003 and accept it with -std=f2008 and later. (Cf. PR 45521) Since F08 allows it and the two interfaces in comment 0 are distinguishable by common sense, I would say it's not worth to implement any diagnostics for it. How about counting this as a bug in the F03 standard and closing the PR as invalid (as suggested by Mikael)?
[Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004 --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2013-04-28 17:14:05 UTC --- Two dummy arguments are distinguishable if neither is a subroutine and neither is TKR compatible (5.1.1.2) with the other. AFAICT this is not a constraint on the compiler to diagnose it. How about counting this as a bug in the F03 standard and closing the PR as invalid (as suggested by Mikael)? If nobody want to do the changes for a diagnostic under -std=f95/f2003, I think it should be closed as WONTFIX to better reflect the situation.
[Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004 Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6 from Mikael Morin mikael at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-12 11:22:39 UTC --- The test in comment #0 is accepted and outputs: $ ./comment_0 1 2 $ Which seems sensible to me. Close as INVALID?
[Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-12 12:52:42 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) The test in comment #0 is accepted and outputs: $ ./comment_0 1 2 $ Which seems sensible to me. Well the program in comment 0 is invalid in Fortran 2003 but valid in Fortran 2008 (cf. quotes in comment 0 and comment 5.) Thus, we should reject it with -std=f95/f2003 and accept it with -std=f2008 and later. (Cf. PR 45521)
[Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
--- Comment #5 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-20 07:31 --- Note: Fortran 2008 is better in this regard: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/ff402a68a17d2be9 Here is the relevant text from the current draft, 08-007r2. Reference is sec. 12.4.3.4.5, par. 3. [Begin quote] Two dummy arguments are distinguishable if: * One is a procedure and the other is a data object, [End of quote] -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
[Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-04-17 07:30 --- More talk about that recently: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/ff402a68a17d2be9/543de4c347caa9d0 This is well described in the last example of C.11.2. -- fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|-00-00 00:00:00 |2008-04-17 07:30:31 date|| http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
[Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-12-14 12:33 --- Related bug: PR 20896 (esp. test case in PR 20896 comment 0). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
[Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
--- Comment #2 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-08 10:32 --- Two dummy arguments are distinguishable if neither is a subroutine and neither is TKR compatible (5.1.1.2) with the other. Does this mean, though, that a subroutine is or is not distinguishable from a variable? This indeed means that for (checking) generic interfaces, a subroutine dummy is not distinguishable from a variable or function dummy. (And for distinguishing variables/functions dummies only TKR is used.) See also http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/18873113b18cd5e9/ and there especially the (first) posts of Craig Dedo and Richard Maine. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
[Bug fortran/34004] Accepts invalid: Ambigiuous interface with subroutine.
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-07 11:02 --- Two dummy arguments are distinguishable if neither is a subroutine and neither is TKR compatible (5.1.1.2) with the other. Does this mean, though, that a subroutine is or is not distinguishable from a variable? I can see nothing in the 95 or 2003 that clarifies this question. Cheers Paul -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34004
