http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50541
Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-09-28
15:02:02 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> What is special about this, is that the generic and the specific procedure
> share the same name. I think the problem is that we only have one symbol for
> both, which triggers the conflict.
I think one could solve this at parse time. When parsing POINTER and
sym->attr.generic and gfc_ns_current->proc_name != sym, we set the attribute to
an interface block. Ditto when parsing "INTERFACE <generic_name>": If one has
already sym->attr.pointer, it is a bug. That should work without further
changes.
Regarding the constructor patch (PR 39427): At least with my current draft
patch does not use a different symbol.
