https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87318
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to janus from comment #4) > (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #3) > > Created attachment 44700 [details] > > Revised dtio_1.f90 > > > > Will this attached version suffice? > > Looks good at first sight. Will try ifort 19 on it soon, in order to see if > it runs as expected. > > Do you think it's feasible to add some sort of diagnostics for this problem? > Or should we rather follow ifort's approach and enforce this restriction > without diagnostic messages? That would probably require a wrapper around > the DTIO procedures that would enforce the restrictions, right? My interpretation is that this is a requirement on the user. Amy diagnostics we add at run time will be a performance hit. I do want to learn what ifort is doing, I do not have it installed at the moment.
