https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119994
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The thread on the J3 ML starts here:
https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/2025-April/015230.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119994
--- Comment #4 from Neil Carlson ---
(In reply to kargls from comment #3)
> Note, Neil has asked on the J3 mailing list for clarification as there
> seems to be a conflict on the requirements of a restricted expression.
I think the list given i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119994
kargls at comcast dot net changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargls at comcast dot net
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119994
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119994
--- Comment #1 from Neil Carlson ---
Here's a similar example using an internal subroutine. The rejected
specification expression is also valid, as again THIS is accessible by host
association.
module foo
type :: bar
integer :: n
end t
