Dear All,
Committed as revision 245596.
Thanks for the review.
Paul
On 16 February 2017 at 18:38, Jerry DeLisle wrote:
> On 02/16/2017 03:31 AM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> The fix for the original bug is tested in dtio_24.f90. It is triggered
>> by the PRIVATE statement i
Dear Jerry,
> OK for trunk. Not applicable for 6-branch
dh! Thanks
> Yes OK as long as we are not in freeze.
This is not, strictly speaking what we all agreed about a year ago; ie
that we would try to abide by gcc conditions. However, I see that
everybody else is committing to their heart'
On 02/16/2017 03:31 AM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
Dear All,
The fix for the original bug is tested in dtio_24.f90. It is triggered
by the PRIVATE statement in the module and occurs because there is no
such generic interface in the module. Note, however, that there is a
typebound generic interfa
Dear All,
The fix for the original bug is tested in dtio_24.f90. It is triggered
by the PRIVATE statement in the module and occurs because there is no
such generic interface in the module. Note, however, that there is a
typebound generic interface, which should not be affected by the
PRIVATE state
