I also see
FAIL: gfortran.dg/select_type_9.f03 -O (test for errors, line 16)
FAIL: gfortran.dg/select_type_9.f03 -O (test for excess errors)
The errors emitted by the test have changed from
/opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/select_type_9.f03:16:11:
class is (t) ! { dg-error "Double CLASS IS block" }
1
Error: Double CLASS IS block in SELECT TYPE statement at (1)
to
/opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/select_type_9.f03:16:11:
/opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/select_type_9.f03:14:11:
class is (t)
2
/opt/gcc/_clean/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/select_type_9.f03:16:11:
class is (t) ! { dg-error "Double CLASS IS block" }
1
Error: CASE label at (1) overlaps with CASE label at (2)
Dominique
> Le 22 oct. 2016 à 09:11, Paul Richard Thomas <[email protected]>
> a écrit :
>
> Hi Dominique,
>
> Thanks for the heads up!
>
> I was going to review Andre's patch this morning, so I will clean my
> tree, apply it, confirm that it is regression free and then will
> generate a compatible version of my patch for PR69834. I strongly
> suspect that the core of the patch is OK and that it is the clean-up
> element that is failing to apply.
>
> Best regards
>
> Paul
>
>
> On 22 October 2016 at 01:04, Dominique d'Humières <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Dear Paul,
>>
>> If I did not do any mistake, this patch conflicts seriously with Andre’s one
>> at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2016-10/msg00141.html.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Dominique
>>
>
>
>
> --
> The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits.
>
> Albert Einstein
