[Bug fortran/64138] gfortran interface issue

2014-12-06 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64138 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/64138] gfortran interface issue

2014-12-02 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64138 --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > That's the conclusion that I'm leaning towards. Reading > section 16 of the standard always makes my head hurt, so > I'm being caution while looking for some subtle point > that I may have missed.

[Bug fortran/64138] gfortran interface issue

2014-12-02 Thread sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64138 --- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl --- On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 05:13:09PM +, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote: > > To conclude I think this PR should be closed as INVALID. > That's the conclusion that I'm leaning towards. Reading section 16 o

[Bug fortran/64138] gfortran interface issue

2014-12-02 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64138 --- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres --- I was sure to have seen discussions about such issues: pr33997 and https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/comp.lang.fortran/GIcxE7GM1ek/aP7eJpQ-T7QJ AFAIU the discussions, the relevant point for this

[Bug fortran/64138] gfortran interface issue

2014-12-02 Thread sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64138 --- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl --- On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 03:37:19PM +, wong.david-c at epa dot gov wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64138 > >What is your fix? > I meant I fixed the code you posted. It was missi

[Bug fortran/64138] gfortran interface issue

2014-12-02 Thread wong.david-c at epa dot gov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64138 --- Comment #5 from david --- Hi, What is your fix? In the original code, c_sub_cr and c_sub_rc are distinct because the sequence of argument type are different. Other compilers have no problem to distinguish them. Please advise. Cheers,

[Bug fortran/64138] gfortran interface issue

2014-12-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64138 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/64138] gfortran interface issue

2014-12-01 Thread wong.david-c at epa dot gov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64138 --- Comment #3 from david --- (In reply to david from comment #0) > Hi, > >I have created a complex number module: > >module complex_number_module > implicit none > > integer, parameter :: loc_real_precision = 8 >

[Bug fortran/64138] gfortran interface issue

2014-12-01 Thread wong.david-c at epa dot gov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64138 --- Comment #2 from david --- Created attachment 34158 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34158&action=edit a small code

[Bug fortran/64138] gfortran interface issue

2014-12-01 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64138 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C