Tobias Burnus <bur...@net-b.de> writes:
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_4.f90
> b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_4.f90
> index 2e871b0..9bf8d86 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_4.f90
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_4.f90
> @@ -5,13 +5,13 @@ IMPLICIT NONE ! { dg-error "Duplicate" }
> END
>
> SUBROUTINE a
> -IMPLICIT REAL(b-j) ! { dg-error "cannot follow" }
> -implicit none ! { dg-error "cannot follow" }
> +IMPLICIT REAL(b-j)
> +implicit none ! { dg-error "Type IMPLICIT NONE statement at .1.
> following an IMPLICIT statement" }
That doesn't match.
/usr/local/gcc/gcc-20141007/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_4.f90:9:103:
Err\or: IMPLICIT NONE (type) statement at (1) following an IMPLICIT statement
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
