https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80009
--- Comment #12 from Walt Brainerd <walt.brainerd at gmail dot com> --- I made a misstatement in my previous message. gfortran 7.0.1 does not accept this. Sorry, my "test" was not correct. I am going to post a query to comp-fortran-90 to see what others think. On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Walt Brainerd <walt.brain...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am not sure what you changed your mind from or to :-). > > Yes, the assignment is invalid because r is real the the rhs is type > B_type. > > And, yes, the type of the io list item is B_type. > > However, the uncommented WRITE statement is valid, and, > in the absence or a DT edit descriptor, the components (one real) are > written in order, so 20.0 is written with f4.1 format. > > ifort 2017 and gfortran 7.01. both agree with this (maybe the latter > because of you). > > If you disagree with this, I would be happy to solicit opinions from more > experts. > > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 10:05 PM, jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org < > gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > >> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80009 >> >> --- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> --- >> After a lot of head scratching I think I am changing my mind on this one. >> >> If one tries to assign to a real variable as in: >> >> program test_b_write_dt_mod >> >> use :: B_write_dt_mod >> implicit none >> >> type(B_type) :: x != B_type(20.0) >> real :: r >> >> r = B_type(20.0) >> >> write (unit=*, fmt="(f4.1)") B_type(20.0) >> !write (unit=*, fmt="(f4.1)") x >> >> end program test_b_write_dt_mod >> >> The effective item is of type B_type not real and the assignment to r is >> rejected. >> >> So I believe the effective type in the write statement is likewise >> derived type >> ad not real. >> >> My thinking is this PR is invalid. >> >> -- >> You are receiving this mail because: >> You reported the bug. > > > > > -- > Walt Brainerd >
