2013/7/25 Tobias Burnus <bur...@net-b.de>: > Janus Weil wrote: >> >> 2013/7/25 Tobias Burnus <bur...@net-b.de>: >> >>> Looks fine to me. (If I tracked the PR correctly, it only solves the >>> original problem but not yet the one of comment 5, does it?) >> >> No, this one should actually fix both. I can also add the variant from >> comment 5 to the test case, if you prefer. > > > I think that would be good - maybe in a separate module but in the same > file?
Same module should be ok, too, I guess. Also it might be good to check for the subroutine case (specific and generic), which should actually throw an error message. That my first patch showed no regressions indicates that such a check is missing in the testsuite. I'll commit the attached version ... Cheers, Janus
typebound_call_25.f90
Description: Binary data
