------- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-05 09:51 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> From the standard:
> "5.2.9 PARAMETER statement
> [...]
> The named constant shall have its type, type parameters, and shape specified
> in
> a prior specification of the specification-part or declared implicitly (5.3).
> If the named constant is typed by the implicit typing rules, its appearance in
> any subsequent specification of the specification-part shall confirm this
> implied
> type and the values of any implied type parameters."
> Thus implies gfortran does the right thing - at least for -std=f95/f2003.
You are right - I will close it as invalid.
Sorry, Michael, but it appears that your code is standard defying. If you
disagree, please come back to us.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED
Resolution| |INVALID
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31465
