[flang-commits] [PATCH] D145100: [flang] Warn about violations of an obscure requirement (15.6.4 p2)

[Peter Klausler via Phabricator via flang-commits]

klausler created this revision.
klausler added a reviewer: PeteSteinfeld.
klausler added a project: Flang.
Herald added subscribers: sunshaoce, jdoerfert.
Herald added a project: All.
klausler requested review of this revision.

The Fortran 2018 standard, perhaps as an attempt to prevent ambiguity
in  older compilers, requires that a statement function appear in an
explicit type declaration statement if its name is also accessible
from a host scope.  F18 <https://reviews.llvm.org/F18> processes the specification parts of inner
procedures first, so we don't need this requirement to prevent
ambiguity, and can only really check it retrospectively after name
resolution.  Emit a portability warning when appropriate.


https://reviews.llvm.org/D145100

Files:
  flang/docs/Extensions.md
  flang/lib/Semantics/check-declarations.cpp
  flang/test/Semantics/stmt-func01.f90


Index: flang/test/Semantics/stmt-func01.f90
===================================================================
--- flang/test/Semantics/stmt-func01.f90
+++ flang/test/Semantics/stmt-func01.f90
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@
   integer :: sf9
   !ERROR: Defining expression of statement function 'sf9' cannot be converted to its result type INTEGER(4)
   sf9(n) = "bad"
+  sf10 = 1.
  contains
   real function explicit(x,y)
     integer, intent(in) :: x
@@ -44,4 +45,8 @@
     real :: arr(2)
     arr = [1., 2.]
   end function
+  subroutine foo
+    !PORTABILITY: An implicitly typed statement function should not appear when the same symbol is available in its host scope
+    sf10(x) = 2.*x
+  end subroutine
 end
Index: flang/lib/Semantics/check-declarations.cpp
===================================================================
--- flang/lib/Semantics/check-declarations.cpp
+++ flang/lib/Semantics/check-declarations.cpp
@@ -1044,6 +1044,15 @@
     if (auto msg{evaluate::CheckStatementFunction(
             symbol, *stmtFunction, context_.foldingContext())}) {
       SayWithDeclaration(symbol, std::move(*msg));
+    } else if (details.result().flags().test(Symbol::Flag::Implicit)) {
+      // 15.6.4 p2 weird requirement
+      if (const Symbol *
+          host{symbol.owner().parent().FindSymbol(symbol.name())}) {
+        evaluate::AttachDeclaration(
+            messages_.Say(symbol.name(),
+                "An implicitly typed statement function should not appear when the same symbol is available in its host scope"_port_en_US),
+            *host);
+      }
     }
   }
   if (IsElementalProcedure(symbol)) {
Index: flang/docs/Extensions.md
===================================================================
--- flang/docs/Extensions.md
+++ flang/docs/Extensions.md
@@ -84,6 +84,10 @@
   scope" -- i.e., not scoped by `BLOCK` constructs.
   As most (but not all) compilers implement `BLOCK` scoping of construct
   names, so does f18, with a portability warning.
+* 15.6.4 paragraph 2 prohibits an implicitly typed statement function
+  from sharing the same name as a symbol in its scope's host, if it
+  has one.
+  We accept this usage witha portability warning.
 
 ## Extensions, deletions, and legacy features supported by default
 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: D145100.501612.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 2250 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/flang-commits/attachments/20230301/33bf168f/attachment-0001.bin>