------- Comment #4 from dick dot hendrickson at gmail dot com 2009-01-19 22:31
-------
Subject: Re: WHERE with multiple elemental defined assignments gives wrong
answer
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 4:18 PM, mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org
<gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
>
>
> ------- Comment #3 from mikael at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-19 22:18
> -------
>> > I suspect the following is invalid as the arguments to the defined
>> > assignment
>> > alias.
>> >
>>
>> Why do you think it is invalid?
> Because the arguments to the i_to_t (or l_to_t) alias. They point to the same
> data.
> I may be wrong however (actually it wouldn't be the first time when arguing
> about standard conformance). I'm sure it is wrong with basic subroutines, but
> mixing that with where, elemental and defined assignment doesn't make it
> clear.
Defined assignment is sort of a special case. A statement like
A = B
is equivalent to
CALL DEFINED_ROUTINE ( A, (B) )
The "extra" parenthesis allow something like
A = A
to work like
CALL DEFINED_ROUTINE ( A, (A) )
and it is legal for the first argument to be intent(out) since the first
and second arguments are different. See 12.3.2.1.2 in F95
Dick Hendrickson
>
>> For what it's worth, the test case compiles
>> successfully with a different compiler. The larger program compiles with
>> several other compilers.
> And it compiles with gfortran too ;).
>
>
> --
>
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38863
>
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
>
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38863
