Re: another way to shoot yourself in the foot?

["James Giles" <jamesgiles@worldnet.att.net>]

Craig Powers wrote:
> Dick Hendrickson wrote:
>> Colin Paul Gloster wrote:
>>>
>>> Does Fortran always automatically check if the INTERFACE actually
>>> corresponds to the code?
>>>
>> Depends on the compiler, but in general NO.  I think all
>> compilers will detect an explicit assignment to a dummy
>> argument that has INTENT(IN) in the subroutine; I'm not sure
>> any will detect an assignment if the dummy is passed on
>> to another routine and that routine (illegally) assigns to
>> its argument.
>
> Is that actually possible without lying about an interface?  i.e. Is
> it possible to pass an INTENT(IN) dummy as an actual argument to a
> more permissive dummy argument in another routine (no intent or
> intent OUT)

It's not permitted.  The standard doesn't require implementations to
verify that it's not done.  That is, it's not one of the kinds of error
that the standard requires implementations to detect and report.

-- 
J. Giles

"I conclude that there are two ways of constructing a software
design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously
no deficiencies and the other way is to make it so complicated
that there are no obvious deficiencies."   --  C. A. R. Hoare

"Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability"  -- E. W. Dijkstra