https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77505
Janne Blomqvist <jb at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jb at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8 from Janne Blomqvist <jb at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Elizebeth Punnoose from comment #6) > Modified code with the warning message moved behind -fcheck=bounds. > > Index: trans-array.c > =================================================================== > --- trans-array.c (revision 241960) > +++ trans-array.c (working copy) > @@ -2226,6 +2226,8 @@ > gfc_ss_info *ss_info; > gfc_expr *expr; > gfc_ss *s; > + tree neg_len; > + char *msg; > > /* Save the old values for nested checking. */ > old_first_len = first_len; > @@ -2271,6 +2273,27 @@ > gfc_conv_expr_type (&length_se, expr->ts.u.cl->length, > gfc_charlen_type_node); > ss_info->string_length = length_se.expr; > + > + /* Check if the character length is negative, > + if so consider it as LEN=0. */ > + neg_len = fold_build2_loc (input_location, LT_EXPR, > + boolean_type_node, ss_info->string_length, > + build_int_cst (gfc_charlen_type_node, 0)); > + /* Print a warning if bounds checking is enabled. */ > + if (gfc_option.rtcheck & GFC_RTCHECK_BOUNDS) > + { > + msg = xasprintf ("Negative character length will be treated as > LEN=0"); > + gfc_trans_runtime_check (false, true, neg_len, > + &length_se.pre, where, msg); > + free(msg); > + } > + ss_info->string_length = fold_build3_loc (input_location, > + COND_EXPR, gfc_charlen_type_node, > + neg_len, gfc_index_zero_node, > + ss_info->string_length); > + ss_info->string_length = gfc_evaluate_now (ss_info->string_length, > + &length_se.pre); > + > gfc_add_block_to_block (&outer_loop->pre, &length_se.pre); > gfc_add_block_to_block (&outer_loop->post, &length_se.post); > } Shouldn't you have build_int_cst (gfc_charlen_type_node, 0) instead of gfc_index_zero_node?