On Nov 22, 2005, at 10:06 AM, W.J. Metzger wrote:
> I have a question concerning PRIVATE. I thought I understood it, but
> now a routine which has worked with several compilers no longer works
> with the newest version of one of them. The question is whether the
> new
> compiler has a bug and the other compilers "extensions" or I do not
> understand the use of PRIVATE. The attached routines illustrate the
> problem.
[details and code elided]
The code all looks fine to me. The two compilers I checked it on agree
(g95 and nag's f95, both on my Mac). Of course, the compilers aren't
the final word, but I did use them for a sanity check to see if my eye
missed anything obvious.
The module procedure specific name, being private, should not be
visible outside the module and thus should not cause conflicts with
names outside the module. The fact that the procedure is accessible
outside the module via the defined assignment does nothing to change
this.
I think you've just got a bug in the new compiler version. I see no
extensions to the standard involved. You also have a nice,
self-contained sample for a bug report, which I suggest might be
appropriate to the vendor in question.
--
Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience;
[log in to unmask] | experience comes from bad judgment.
| -- Mark Twain
|