https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116530
--- Comment #7 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargls from comment #5)
> (In reply to anlauf from comment #4)
> > (In reply to kargls from comment #1)
> > > (In reply to philippe.wautelet from comment #0)
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure it is conforming to the Fortran standard but it shouldn't
> > > > trigger an ICE.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I agree with you about the ICE should not happen. Staring at F2023,
> > > I find the following constraint.
> > >
> > > C8107 (R871) The namelist-group-name shall not be a name accessed by use
> > > association.
> > >
> > > If I understand it, your code is nonstandard. But, I don't use namelist,
> > > so
> > > will need to read through the Fortran standard a bit more.
> >
> > This constraint applies to the namelist statement and does not apply to the
> > issue here.
>
> Yeah, I needed to review more the Fortran, and you beat me
> to working out a patch. The '(R871)' above restricts the
> constraint to namelist statement. However, this did lead to
>
> module mod_nml1
> implicit none
> logical :: ldiag
> namelist /nam_nml1/ldiag
> end module mod_nml1
>
> program ice_nml
> use mod_nml1
> implicit none
> integer :: ilu, j
> namelist /nam_nml1/j !<-- Does this violates C8107?
Yes, that is illegal and rejected by Intel and NAG, e.g.:
NAG Fortran Compiler Release 7.2(Shin-Urayasu) Build 7200
Error: iii.f90, line 11: Redeclaration of symbol NAM_NML1 from USEd module
MOD_NML1
detected at /@NAM_NML1
Warning: iii.f90, line 15: Unused local variable ILU
[NAG Fortran Compiler pass 1 error termination, 1 error, 1 warning]
I think we should track that constraint violation separately (no regression)
from the present PR (regression).
> ldiag = .false.
> j = 42
> write(*,nml=nam_nml1)
> end program ice_nml
>
> % gfcx -o z a.f90 && ./z
> &NAM_NML1
> LDIAG=F,
> J=42 ,
> /
