https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122290
--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargls from comment #4) > (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #3) > > (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #2) > > > I should be able to get at this a little later today. > > > > As usual, when reading email and not reading all of Steve's post, I leaped > > on faith that Steve had it figured out. Yes, Damian really finds some > > interesting issues. ;) > > I don't know enough of the implementation details for PDT, > but this looks like it might be a rabbit hole. I suspect > the patch in comment #1 is only a small bandage. The 2nd > error that occurs with the patch in place is coming from > the reduction of an initialization expression. This is > I think going to be challenging. I'm beginning to > wonder if we need an EXPR_TYPE_PARAM or BT_TYPE_PARAM > enum to short circuit the evaluation until gfortran has > an actual type-param-value. This would likely occur > somewhere in resolve.cc. There are seemingly similar issues with kind in some constant expressions involving implied-do, e.g. pr91963 and pr97408.
