https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107560
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed| |2023-03-24
CC| |kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #1)
> This used to fail, but appears to have been fixed in the meantime.
> A possible candidate for variant z2.f90 seems the fix for pr103413.
>
> While looking at valgrind output with current trunk, I see a memleak
> for the BOZ case that is obviously plugged by:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/expr.cc b/gcc/fortran/expr.cc
> index 4662328bf31..7fb33f81788 100644
> --- a/gcc/fortran/expr.cc
> +++ b/gcc/fortran/expr.cc
> @@ -466,6 +466,10 @@ free_expr0 (gfc_expr *e)
> mpc_clear (e->value.complex);
> break;
>
> + case BT_BOZ:
> + free (e->boz.str);
> + break;
> +
> default:
> break;
> }
>
> This might have been overseen during the BOZ rework.
> Regtesting ...
Yep. It was missed by the guy that did the BOZ rework. ;-)
If it passed regtesting, it's ok to commit.
