Hi Paul, this is OK. Thanks for the work. Jerry
On Thu, Oct 22, 2026, 8:03 AM Paul Richard Thomas < [email protected]> wrote: > Hello All, > > The Jerry/Claude review revealed: > Verdict: Blocker: new ICEs for MOLD= an assumed-LEN dummy, a > deferred-LEN allocatable, or a component. Blocker: a module procedure > result in a submodule now ICEs. There is no test for bug23. > > These issues are all fixed in the attached patch, which also passes > regression testing. > > OK for mainline? > > Regards > > Paul > > On Thu, 8 Oct 2026 at 13:36, Paul Richard Thomas > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > bug16-mold-loses-len.f90 failed to give the correct result because > > ALLOCATE with MOLD= did not propagate the LEN parameter. > > > > The ChangeLog provides quite enough explanation of what the patch does. > > > > Passes regtesting on FC44/x86_64. OK for mainline. > > > > Cheers > > > > Paul >
