Hi!
First of all, many thanks for the patch!
If i may, i have a question concerning the chosen style in the error
message and one nitpick concerning a return type though, the latter
primarily prompting this reply.
On Tue, 20 Jun 2023 11:54:25 +0100
Paul Richard Thomas via Fortran <fort...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/expr.cc b/gcc/fortran/expr.cc
> index d5cfbe0cc55..c960dfeabd9 100644
> --- a/gcc/fortran/expr.cc
> +++ b/gcc/fortran/expr.cc
> @@ -6470,6 +6480,22 @@ gfc_check_vardef_context (gfc_expr* e, bool pointer,
> bool alloc_obj,
> }
> return false;
> }
> + else if (context && gfc_is_ptr_fcn (assoc->target))
> + {
> + if (!gfc_notify_std (GFC_STD_F2018, "%qs at %L associated to "
> + "pointer function target being used in a "
> + "variable definition context (%s)", name,
> + &e->where, context))
I'm curious why you decided to put context in braces and not simply use
quotes as per %qs?
> + return false;
> + else if (gfc_has_vector_index (e))
> + {
> + gfc_error ("%qs at %L associated to vector-indexed target"
> + " cannot be used in a variable definition"
> + " context (%s)",
> + name, &e->where, context);
Ditto.
> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/match.cc b/gcc/fortran/match.cc
> index e7be7fddc64..0e4b5440393 100644
> --- a/gcc/fortran/match.cc
> +++ b/gcc/fortran/match.cc
> @@ -6377,6 +6377,39 @@ build_class_sym:
> }
>
>
> +/* Build the associate name */
> +static int
> +build_associate_name (const char *name, gfc_expr **e1, gfc_expr **e2)
> +{
> + return 1;
> + return 0;
> +}
I've gone through the frontend recently and changed several such
boolean functions to use bool where appropriate. May i ask folks to use
narrower types in new code, please?
Iff later in the pipeline it is considered appropriate or benefical to
promote types, these will eventually be promoted.
> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc
> index e6a4337c0d2..18589e17843 100644
> --- a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc
> +++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc
> @@ -1906,6 +1915,7 @@ gfc_get_symbol_decl (gfc_symbol * sym)
> gcc_assert (!sym->value || sym->value->expr_type == EXPR_NULL);
> }
>
> +
ISTM that the addition of vertical whitespace like here is in
contradiction with the coding style.
Please kindly excuse my comment and, again, thanks!
> gfc_finish_var_decl (decl, sym);
>
> if (sym->ts.type == BT_CHARACTER)
