On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 12:28:12PM +0200, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 05:44:55PM +0200, Dominique d'Humières wrote:
> >>>> Is the following patch OK (regtested on x86_64-apple-darwin15)? Should
> >>>> it be back ported to the gcc-5 branch?
> >>>
> >>> No and No.
> > Le 7 avr. 2016 à 15:59, Steve Kargl <s...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> a
> > écrit :
> >
> > The latter is obvious as this "fixes" neither a regression
> > nor documentation.
>
> I won’t argue.
>
> > For the former, see Fortran 95, section 4.5.
> >
> > --
> > steve
>
>
> Are you referring to
>
> (a) An empty sequence forms a zero-sized rank-one array.
>
> (b) The type and type parameters of an array constructor are those of the
> ac-value expressions.
>
> (c) something else?
>
Fortran 95 doesn't have a type-spec in an array constructor.
Fortran 95 explicitly states
"The type and type parameters of an array constructor are
those of the ac-value expressions."
(/ /) is valid Fortran 95 syntax while (/ type-spec :: /) is
not valid. type-spec was introduced in Fortran 2003. The
error message as written is correct.
(/ /) is empty.
(/type-spec :: /) is not empty, and is invalid Fortan 95.
(/1, 2, 3/) is not empty and has a type of INTEGER.
program foo
call bar((/ /))
end program foo
% gfc -c -std=f95 foo.f90
foo.f90:2:17:
call bar((/ /))
1
Error: Empty array constructor at (1) is not allowed
The above error is correct. Adding any text referring
to type-spec is wrong.
--
Steve
