Am 17.01.20 um 15:42 schrieb Steve Kargl:
Gfortran probably should not try to guess what the user
thought s/he wanted. The generic "Syntax error" would
seem to apply here. To me, foo(1)%a looks much more like
an array reference rather than a function reference.
OK, so here's a patch which does just that.
The error message low looks like
function_reference_1.f90:9:8:
9 | print *, foo(1)%a ! { dg-error "Syntax error" }
| 1
Error: Syntax error in expression at (1)
The location information is a bit off, but in the absence of location
information for the reference (which we do not collect), I think this
is the best I can do.
So, OK for trunk (with the old ChangeLog)?
Regards
Thomas
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
index 6f2a4c4d65a..a846677b770 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
@@ -3129,6 +3129,12 @@ resolve_function (gfc_expr *expr)
|| sym->intmod_sym_id == GFC_ISYM_CAF_SEND))
return true;
+ if (expr->ref)
+ {
+ gfc_error ("Syntax error in expression at %L", &expr->where);
+ return false;
+ }
+
if (sym && sym->attr.intrinsic
&& !gfc_resolve_intrinsic (sym, &expr->where))
return false;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/function_reference_1.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/function_reference_1.f90
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..1b7f4809c5c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/function_reference_1.f90
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! PR 44960 - this was erroneusly accepted.
+! Original test case by Daniel Franke.
+
+type t
+ integer :: a
+end type t
+type(t) :: foo
+print *, foo(1)%a ! { dg-error "Syntax error" }
+end
+
! { dg-do compile }
! PR 44960 - this was erroneusly accepted.
! Original test case by Daniel Franke.
type t
integer :: a
end type t
type(t) :: foo
print *, foo(1)%a ! { dg-error "Syntax error" }
end
