https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114141
--- Comment #12 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #11)
...snip...
> I know you had some ASSOCIATE patches in the works, and
> certainly do not want to interfere. Do you want to
> incorporate my patch or some variation
|NEW
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2024-02-29
--- Comment #10 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #9)
> --- snip ---
> > % gfcx -o z a.f90
> > a.f90:5:6:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113363
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #2)
> >
> > Both allocation with source and assignment are broken :-(
>
> With numerical output from foo ([1,2,3,4,5]), we get:
>
>1 3
|1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
>
> Both allocation with source and assignment are broken :-(
With numerical output from foo ([1,2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113363
--- Comment #1 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #0)
> While discussing a patch for PR89645/99065, the following issue with
> ASSOCIATE and unlimited polymorphic functions was found:
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89645
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 56892
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56892=edit
An experimental patch for two pass compilation of contained procedures with
failures
I am giving up on this. Failures
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112834
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||87477
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas
dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2023-12-06
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 56814
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 56777
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56777=edit
testcase demonstrating prob
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89645
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85836
--- Comment #7 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 56774
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56774=edit
Features 6.x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85836
--- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 56773
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56773=edit
Feature 5.12
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85836
--- Comment #5 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 56772
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56772=edit
Features 4.x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85836
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 56771
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56771=edit
Features 2.x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85836
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 56770
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56770=edit
Features 1.x
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85836
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102689
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 56730
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56730=edit
Another failing testcase
With the attached, we should get:
[pault@pc30 pr87477]$ rm ./a.out;ifort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55824
--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #7)
> Seems to be working in GCC 7+.
Hmmm! It seems to me to be broken from 7-branch through the current mainline.
Cheers
Paul
||2023-11-29
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Paul Thomas ---
Confirmed!
implicit none (type, external)
type t
integer :: i
end type t
integer :: j
integer :: src(100) = [(j
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112459
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
Hi Sebastien,
I have posted the patch to the gfortran list. Hopefully, the bug will be fixed
this weekend.
Thanks for the report.
Paul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112459
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-11-09
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112407
--- Comment #6 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Tomáš Trnka from comment #5)
> I'm looking forward to any more information on the root cause.
I have failed to produce a compact reproducer that resembles your bug. In fact,
you will note the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112407
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112407
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98498
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112316
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112316
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2023-11-02
Ever confirmed|0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87448
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98458
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103854
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96320
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213
--- Comment #38 from Paul Thomas ---
This bug has fixed itself on mainline. I thought that it might be
r14-4943-g8d2130a4e5ce369f5884c8522934dc027db6e9d8 but reversion didn't cause a
recurrence.
@Martin - as and when you have the time, could
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #37
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97045
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104555
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104625
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67740
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104625
--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #6)
> Steve Lionel of Intel confirmed that the code is valid, and that if X is
> polymorphic, so is (X):
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104625
--- Comment #7 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #6)
> Steve Lionel of Intel confirmed that the code is valid, and that if X is
> polymorphic, so is (X):
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104625
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39627
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 56098
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56098=edit
Evidence for replies in last attachment
As promised in the previous entry in this PR.
Paul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39627
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2
|--- |FIXED
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #15 from Paul Thomas ---
>From as far back as GNU Fortran (GCC) 11.2.1 20210728, the pointer function
assignment gives the correct result arr(-1) = -666.0
Marking it as fixed.
Paul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39627
Bug 39627 depends on bug 52994, which changed state.
Bug 52994 Summary: [OOP] [F08] internal compiler error: in
gfc_trans_assignment_1, at fortran/trans-expr.c:6881
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52994
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67740
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336
Bug 37336 depends on bug 111674, which changed state.
Bug 111674 Summary: [13/14 regression] Failure to finalize an allocatable
subobject of a non-finalizable type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111674
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111674
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
|NEW
Last reconfirmed||2023-10-03
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 56036
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56036=edit
Fix for this PR
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 56035
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=56035=edit
Testc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80757
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19276
Bug 19276 depends on bug 92586, which changed state.
Bug 92586 Summary: ICE in gimplify_expr, at gimplify.c:13479 with nested
allocatable derived types
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92586
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92586
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68155
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19276
Bug 19276 depends on bug 68155, which changed state.
Bug 68155 Summary: ICE on initializing character array in type (len_lhs <>
len_rhs)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68155
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111271
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68155
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
|1
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to David Binderman from comment #1)
> git blame says
>
> 6c95fe9bc0 (Pa
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97122
--- Comment #13 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #12)
> Fixed on mainline for gcc-14.
>
> Shall we close it? Or does it deserve backporting?
Hi Harald,
I was considering a backport of a composite finalization patch to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92586
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92586
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #11
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109684
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109684
--- Comment #16 from Paul Thomas ---
>
> I am wondering about the pureness test itself, however. Surely, the test
> should be for impure procedures that are referenced and not just accessible?
>
> Paul
Cancel that comment - it's nonsense!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109684
--- Comment #15 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #14)
> (In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #13)
> > (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #12)
> > > On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 10:04:54PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109684
--- Comment #13 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #12)
> On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 10:04:54PM +, kargl at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc b/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc
> > index
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110720
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #1)
> Looks like a dup of pr109948, which is fixed on 14-trunk.
>
> @Paul: do you think your patch (commit r14-1487-g3c2eba4) is
> backportable to 13-branch?
I know that it
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99139
--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #7)
> Updating known-to-work/known to fail version.
>
> Paul/Steve: do you want to assign this PR to one of you?
I am of two minds as to whether or not to backport the patch
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106050
--- Comment #7 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #6)
> (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #5)
> > Possibly walking the symbols in reverse order to release them would fix
> > this.
> >
> It seems to work:
>
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106050
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
Created attachment 55515
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55515=edit
Patch that fixes this PR for me
I had to add to Steve's patch to get this PR sorted out.
Ideally of course, we would
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106050
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #2)
> Likely started with r8-3056-g5bab4c9631c478b7, it was rejected before the
> revision anyway.
With all branches up to 13-branch, I see:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104649
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #2)
> Null pointer dereference.
>
>
> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/decl.cc b/gcc/fortran/decl.cc
> index bd586e75008..8e2cd511c4d 100644
> --- a/gcc/fortran/decl.cc
> +++
||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|Internal compiler error:|[PDT] Internal compiler
|Parameterised derived types |error: Parameterised
||derived types
--- Comment #1 from Paul Thomas ---
Added to PDT meta
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108663
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107142
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
Added to PDT meta-bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107142
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105380
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||82173
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104650
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||82173
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas
||82173
Last reconfirmed||2023-06-30
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #1 from Paul Thomas ---
Added to PDT meta-bug
Referenced Bugs:
https
||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
Added to PDT meta-bug
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82173
[Bug 82173] [meta-bug] [PDT] Parameterized derived type errors
||2023-06-30
Blocks||82173
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #1 from Paul Thomas ---
Added to PDT meta-bug
Referenced Bugs:
https
|1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Last reconfirmed||2023-06-30
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
Added to PDT meta-bug
Referenced Bugs:
https
|1
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Blocks||82173
Last reconfirmed||2023-06-30
--- Comment #9 from Paul Thomas ---
Added to PDT meta-bug
Referenced Bugs:
https
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103371
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||82173
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102901
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102686
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||82173
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102457
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||82173
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102241
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
Added to PDT meta-bug
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82173
[Bug 82173] [meta-bug] [PDT] Parameterized derived type errors
||2023-06-30
Blocks||82173
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas ---
Added to PDT meta-bug
Referenced Bugs:
https
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99709
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98023
--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas ---
Added to PDT meta-bug
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95543
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95541
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||82173
--- Comment #2 from Paul Thomas
||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
Added to PDT meta-bug
Referenced Bugs:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82173
[Bug 82173] [meta-bug] [PDT] Parameterized derived type errors
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87908
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89645
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
*** Bug 99065 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87477
Bug 87477 depends on bug 99065, which changed state.
Bug 99065 Summary: ASSOCIATE function selector expression "no IMPLICIT type"
failure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99065
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99065
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49213
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Damian Rouson from comment #1)
> Here's a shorter reproducer:
>
> % cat resh
101 - 200 of 2180 matches
Mail list logo
