Fix array symbol duplication in interactive mode

[Vipul-Cariappa]

Fixes the following problem:

❯ lf
Interactive Fortran. Experimental prototype, not ready for end users.
LFortran version: 0.0.0
  * Use Ctrl-D to exit
  * Use Enter to submit
  * Use Alt-Enter or Ctrl-N to make a new line
    - Editing (Keys: Left, Right, Home, End, Backspace, Delete)
    - History (Keys: Up, Down)
>>> integer :: i(10)                                                                                                1,17  ]
>>> print *, i                                                                                                      1,11  ]
Internal Compiler Error: Unhandled exception
Traceback (most recent call last):
  Binary file "/home/vipul/Workspace/others/lfortran/src/bin/lfortran", in _start()
  Binary file "/lib64/libc.so.6", in __libc_start_main_alias_2()
  Binary file "/lib64/libc.so.6", in __libc_start_call_main()
  File "/home/vipul/Workspace/others/lfortran/src/bin/lfortran.cpp", line 2462, in main()
    return main_app(argc, argv);
  File "/home/vipul/Workspace/others/lfortran/src/bin/lfortran.cpp", line 2256, in main_app(int, char**)
    return prompt(arg_v, compiler_options);
  File "/home/vipul/Workspace/others/lfortran/src/bin/lfortran.cpp", line 298, in prompt()
    res = e.evaluate(input, verbose, lm, lpm, diagnostics);
  File "/home/vipul/Workspace/others/lfortran/src/lfortran/fortran_evaluator.cpp", line 126, in LCompilers::FortranEvaluator::evaluate(std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const&, bool, LCompilers::LocationManager&, LCompilers::PassManager&, LCompilers::diag::Diagnostics&)
    e->add_module(std::move(m));
  File "/home/vipul/Workspace/others/lfortran/src/libasr/codegen/evaluator.cpp", line 244, in LCompilers::LLVMEvaluator::add_module(std::unique_ptr<LCompilers::LLVMModule, std::default_delete<LCompilers::LLVMModule> >)
    add_module(std::move(m->m_m));
LCompilersException: addModule() returned an error: Duplicate definition of symbol 'i'

[Vipul-Cariappa]

cc @Shaikh-Ubaid

[certik]

I think that's fine, thanks for adding a test.

[Shaikh-Ubaid]

>>> print *, i  

We also should be able to support printing i for the following. Using an explicit print should not be necessary.

i

[Vipul-Cariappa]

We also should be able to support printing i for the following. Using an explicit print should not be necessary.

Yes, but it is not supported yet. That is printing any of the aggregate datatypes in the REPL without explicit print is not yet supported. I will add it in eventually, with the support to print list, dict, etc.