Hi,
I just committed as simple and obvious the patch below. This
fixes a 8/9/10 regression where a false positive with -Wdo-subscript
(which we know about) was compounded by an also invalid error.
Fixed by suppressing errors at the right time.
I will also commit the patch to the other affected branches.
Regards
Thomas
2013-08-13 Thomas Koenig <tkoe...@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/90563
* frontend-passes.c (insert_index): Suppress errors while
simplifying the resulting expression.
2013-08-13 Thomas Koenig <tkoe...@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/90563
* gfortran.dg/do_subsript_5.f90: New test.
Index: testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_5.f90
===================================================================
--- testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_5.f90 (Revision 274394)
+++ testsuite/gfortran.dg/do_subscript_5.f90 (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
! { dg-do compile }
+! { dg-additional-options "-Wdo-subscript" }
! PR 90563 - this used to be rejected, wrongly
! Original test case by Tobias Neumann
program test
@@ -9,9 +10,11 @@
p = 0.0
- do j=1,6
+ ! The following warnings are actually bogus, but we are not yet
+ ! clever enough to suppress them.
+ do j=1,6 ! { dg-warning "out of bounds" }
if (j<5) then
- p(j) = p(swap(j))
+ p(j) = p(swap(j)) ! { dg-warning "out of bounds" }
endif
enddo
end program
! { dg-do compile }
! { dg-additional-options "-Wdo-subscript" }
! PR 90563 - this used to be rejected, wrongly
! Original test case by Tobias Neumann
program test
implicit none
integer, parameter :: swap(4) = [2,1,3,4]
real :: p(20)
integer :: j
p = 0.0
! The following warnings are actually bogus, but we are not yet
! clever enough to suppress them.
do j=1,6 ! { dg-warning "out of bounds" }
if (j<5) then
p(j) = p(swap(j)) ! { dg-warning "out of bounds" }
endif
enddo
end program
