Committed as revision 228222. Thanks for all the help. I'll update the fortran documentation tomorrow.
Cheers Paul On 28 September 2015 at 20:22, Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Mikael, > > ....snip... > >>> * io.c (next_char_not_space): Change tab warning to warning now >>> to prevent locus being lost. >> >> This has disappeared? > > duuh! Thanks > > > ....snip.... > >> I think that for better error reporting (avoid unclassifiable statement), >> the gfc_notification_std can be dropped, as there is a specific >> gfc_notify_std guarding resolution. > > That's true - I'll check it out right now. > >> >> Same for the rest of the condition. gfc_match_ptr_fcn_assign carrefully >> restores existing errors upon failure, so I would rather use it more often. >> >> So, can you try removing the condition completely (and use the match macro >> above again)? that should improve errors in ptr_func_assign_2, and >> hopefully not regress. >> If it does regress, let's keep it as is. > > It does regress - that's why it is the way it is. Fortunately, > MATCH_ERROR for statement functions would produce pretty much the same > result in pointer function assignments. The regression is in > recursive_statement_functions.f90, which just gets hopelessly tangled > up in error recovery. > > ....snip.... > >> Nit: Usually, we don't put the 'F2008:' prefix. >> Also may be explicit a bit more: "function result as assigned-to variable" >> or something alike. > > Nits or not, they are good points :-) > >> >> Anyway, those are nits, and the rest looks good to me. >> So, with the above comments, the patch is OK as far as I'm concerned. >> Thanks > > OK - I'll try to do the honours tonight. > > Thanks for the reviews. > > Paul -- Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. Groucho Marx
