A "side-effect" of Tobias Burnus' fix for PR92996, which addressed
simplification
of some array-valued constant expression, is that it fixes the ICE in the
subject.
To make sure that we do not regress I committed the testcase below as
rev.279699.
This was OKed in the PR by Thomas König.
Thanks,
Harald
2019-12-21 Harald Anlauf <anl...@gmx.de>
PR fortran/91661
* gfortran.dg/pr91661.f90: New test.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr91661.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr91661.f90 (nicht existent)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr91661.f90 (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+! { dg-do run }
+! PR fortran/91661
+! Contributed by Gerhard Steinmetz
+! Verify that fix for PR92996 also fixes this one
+program p
+ integer, parameter :: a(2) = 2
+ integer, parameter :: b(a(1)) = 3
+ integer, parameter :: c = dot_product(b, b)
+ integer, parameter :: d(a(1)+a(2)) = 3
+ integer, parameter :: e = size (d,dim=1)
+ if (c /= 18) stop 1 ! This used to ICE
+ if (e /= 4) stop 2 ! This used to ICE
+end
