https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114438
--- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #5) > (In reply to anlauf from comment #3) > > The same text existed in F2018, so it is not new: F2018:C7103 and Note 1. > > > > Either every compiler developer team misunderstood that clause, or we > > need an interp, based on the example, to be able to convince all of them. > > > > (I know of developers who do overwrite default constructors, and it > > currently > > works "everywhere", so clarification is important.) > > > > What do you think? > > I sent an email to the J3 mailing list > > https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/2024-March/014649.html > > I included a question whether keywords can be used. See mailing list for response. gfortran's current behavior appears corrects with the possible exception that gfortran does not detect and report the violation of a numbered constraint. Perhaps, a warning should be emitted under -Wall or -Wsurprising.
