A colleague has discovered a problem in a library that I wrote.  Being
a good `debugger', he has already distilled a minimal skeleton from my
code:

    module foo1
      type, public :: xx
    	 integer :: i
      end type xx
    end module foo1
    
    module foo2
      use foo1, only: xx0=>xx
      private
      public :: xx0
    end module foo2
    
    module foo3
      use foo2, only: xx0
      private
      type, public :: xx
    	 type(xx0) :: g
      end type xx
    end module foo3
    
    module foo
      use foo3, only: xx
    contains
      subroutine foobar(x)
    	type(xx), intent(in) :: x
      end subroutine foobar
    end module foo

DIGITAL Fortran complaines:

    ohl@nhc:~ohl$ f90 -version foo.f90
    DIGITAL Fortran 90 V5.1-594
    f90: Error: foo.f90, line 25: The same named entity from different
    	 modules and/or program units cannot be referenced.   [XX]
    	type(xx), intent(in) :: x
    ---------^

while NAG f95 accepts the source and produces correct code.  We both
think that DIGITAL Fortran is incorrect and that my code is correct.
What's the opinion of the board's combined expertise?

Cheers,
-Thorsten

PS: In case anybody wonders what the real world code is about: the
    construction is used to switch from serial to parallel (MPI) code
    by changing only one line from

       use vamp

    to

       use vampi

    in application programs, when the MPI version requires additional
    bookkeeping.
    (see ftp://heplix.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de/pub/ohl/vamp/)
-- 
Thorsten Ohl, Physics Department, TU Darmstadt -- [log in to unmask]
http://heplix.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de/~ohl/ [<=== PGP public key here]


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%