New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Support naked subprograms in MissingImplicit rule #50

Open

bilal-chughtai opened this issue Mar 25, 2022 · 1 comment

Labels

Milestone

0.4.2 - New rules...

Contributor

bilal-chughtai commented Mar 25, 2022

At the minute, naked subprograms are ignored in the rule checking for implicit statements. We should try and find these too.

Contributor Author

bilal-chughtai commented Mar 25, 2022

This is pretty easy - just need to add the following;

scope_units.extend(subject.path(['Function_Subprogram']))
scope_units.extend(subject.path(['Subroutine_Subprogram']))

and appropriate testing

bilal-chughtai changed the title ~~Support naked subprogram's in MissingImplicit rule~~ Support naked subprograms in MissingImplicit rule

MatthewHambley added the enhancement label

MatthewHambley added this to the 0.4 - Performance and, of course, more rules milestone

MatthewHambley modified the milestones: 0.4.0 - Performance and, of course, more rules, 0.5.0 - Feature release

MatthewHambley modified the milestones: 0.5.0 - Feature release, 0.4.2 - New rules and Bug fixes

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment