https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69080
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC|kargl at gcc dot gnu.org |
--- Comment #11 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Mueller from comment #9)
> (In reply to Mueller from comment #8)
> > I think, in theory, the compiler could detect something like
> >
> > call some_subroutine(function_returning_allocatable())
> >
> > to be a potential case for automatic deallocation of the returned
> > allocatable. But, as was pointed out above (if I understood correctly),
> > automatic deallocation of allocatable function results is not part of the
> > standard.
>
> Now that I'm thinking about the example above: Isn't the allocatable
> function result here a local (temporary) variable and should thus be
> deallocated automatically?
No, it is not a local temporary variable. If the function
result is deallocated prior to returning from the function,
what exactly is going to be returned? Whatever had been stored
in the memory associated with the allocated function result
variable would be gone. That is, you can't reference
unallocated memory.
Please bugzilla is not a forum for learning Fortran.
