https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90111
Bug ID: 90111
Summary: Placement of Fortran OpenACC 'routine' directive
inside 'specification-part'
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc, rejects-valid
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: tschwinge at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
OpenACC 2.7 (same in 2.6), in section 2.15.1. "Routine Directive" states that
"In Fortran, the 'routine' directive without a name may appear within the
specification part of a subroutine or function definition, or within an
interface body for a subroutine or function in an interface block, and applies
to the containing subroutine or function. The 'routine' directive with a name
may appear in the specification part of a subroutine, function or module, and
applies to the named subroutine or function".
It therefore seems wrong to me that the following gets rejected:
subroutine s
!$acc routine seq
implicit none
integer :: i
i = 0
end subroutine s
2 | !$acc routine seq
| 2
3 | implicit none
| 1containi
Error: IMPLICIT NONE statement at (1) cannot follow !$ACC ROUTINE statement
at (2)
Or am I misunderstanding something about 'implicit-stmt'? But at least for the
'routine' directive without a name, which always implicitly applies to the
containing subprogram etc., this placement should not matter at all (thus, the
above be valid).
I have not looked for any other such rejects-valid constructs.
