--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 06:19 ---
Fixed on trunk.
Thanks for the report
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 06:13 ---
Subject: Bug 42481
Author: pault
Date: Thu Jan 14 06:13:19 2010
New Revision: 155876
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155876
Log:
2010-01-14 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/42481
* mod
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-13 22:16 ---
I am just about to post a fix.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-05 09:20 ---
See also
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.fortran/browse_thread/thread/b128e5ed244a2516
Richard Maine thinks it is valid - and I also do not see (ad hoc) any reason
why it should be invalid.
--
burnus at
--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2009-12-23 22:39 ---
Note that I personally would declare sub as generic in mod1, e.g.
module mod1
interface sub
module procedure sub
end interface
contains
subroutine sub(x)
real x
end subroutine sub
end module mod1
and remove
--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2009-12-23 22:31 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
Funny, ifort 11.1, xlf 12.1.0.5 and Sunstudio 12.1 accept the code,
but nagfor 5.2 rejects it with:
NAG Fortran Compiler Release 5.2(686)
Warning: prog.f90, line 23: Unused dummy variable X
