Interface confusion warning

Interface confusion warning

Moved from unrelated thread

Retired 12/31/2016
6 posts / 0 new
Last post
For more complete information about compiler optimizations, see our Optimization Notice.

Thanks.

An oddity when compiling with 12.0 and /stand:f03 shown by the attached - might be related to the ICE reported earlier.

interface-confusion.f90

>ifort /c /stand:f03 interface-confusion.f90
Intel Visual Fortran Compiler XE for applications running on IA-32, Version 1
2.0.0.104 Build 20101006
Copyright (C) 1985-2010 Intel Corporation.  All rights reserved.

interface-confusion.f90: warning #7925: An interface-block in a subprogram shall
 not contain an interface-body for a procedure defined by that subprogram.   [EX
TENSIONMOD^PARENTMOD^PROC_INTF]

As far as I can tell the interface-block in the example does not do what the warning suggests (names are different for one thing, no procedures defined in the same module as the interface, etc.)

If the modules are placed in separate files the warning is seen to be associated with a file that has the ultimate module, which has no interface-block's or procedures.

Plus my experience is that "^" separating symbols in compiler output is a harbinger of doom.

I don't see this error with Update 1.

C:Projects>ifort /c /stand:f03 interface-confusion.f90
Intel Visual Fortran Compiler XE for applications running on IA-32, Version 1
2.0.1.127 Build 20101116
Copyright (C) 1985-2010 Intel Corporation.  All rights reserved.


C:Projects>
Retired 12/31/2016

It is still there using Update 1 with a bigger example.

interface-confusion-revisited.f90

>ifort /c /warn:all /check:all /stand:f03 interface-confusion-revisited.f90
Intel Visual Fortran Compiler XE for applications running on IA-32, Version 1
2.0.1.127 Build 20101116
Copyright (C) 1985-2010 Intel Corporation.  All rights reserved.

interface-confusion-revisited.f90: warning #7925: An interface-block in a subpro
gram shall not contain an interface-body for a procedure defined by that subprog
ram.   [FOURMOD^THREEMOD^MY_INTF]

Thanks - this only comes out when you ask for standards checking. I'll report this to the developers. It's interesting that it requires such a complex source to show it. Issue ID is DPD200164410.

Retired 12/31/2016

This got fixed in 13.0, or perhaps earlier, as a side-effect of another change, but we didn't notice that until just now.

Retired 12/31/2016

Leave a Comment

Please sign in to add a comment. Not a member? Join today