[Bug fortran/89266] ICE with TRANSFER of len=0 character array constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #12 from Domi

[Bug fortran/84387] Defined output does not work for a derived type that has no components

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84387 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #10 from Domi

[Bug fortran/87751] ICE in gfc_trans_assignment_1, at fortran/trans-expr.c:10255

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87751 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug middle-end/86979] [9 Regression] ICE: in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2348 with -m32 on darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86979 --- Comment #15 from Dominique d'Humieres --- Full test completed, the PR is fixed without regression. Thanks.

[Bug middle-end/86979] [9 Regression] ICE: in maybe_record_trace_start, at dwarf2cfi.c:2348 with -m32 on darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86979 --- Comment #14 from Dominique d'Humieres --- The patch in comment 13 fixes the ICE for pr69102.c. Testing will start soon. Thanks for the work!

[Bug c/89539] [9.0 regression] gcc fails to build/bootstrap on MACOSX

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89539 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/77604] ICE in get_frame_type, at tree-nested.c:208

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77604 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 --- Comment #5 from Dominique

[Bug fortran/60576] [7/8/9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/assumed_rank_7.f90

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60576 --- Comment #29 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Is this still an issue? I still get the stack-buffer-overflow reported in comment 26 with 8.2 and trunk (9.0) but not with 7.4.

[Bug fortran/87625] [OOP] (re)allocate on assignment fails for polymorphic array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87625 --- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Yes, can this please be back-ported? Still broken on at least 8. This is not a regression.

[Bug fortran/67542] ICE in gfc_emit_parameter_debug_info, at fortran/trans-decl.c:4947 and :4945

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67542 --- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Yep, done. Do you mean that the PR can be closed as FIXED? I am wondering if the tests are valid Fortran.

[Bug fortran/89531] Possible memory corruption in the gfortran front-end

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89531 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/53481] Allow for gfortran (f951) specs option

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53481 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/89516] ICE in gfc_calculate_transfer_sizes at gcc/fortran/check.c:5506

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89516 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/79864] Implicit type conversion on assignment of unallocated array to unallocated array variable segfaults.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79864 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/67542] ICE in gfc_emit_parameter_debug_info, at fortran/trans-decl.c:4947 and :4945

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67542 --- Comment #8 from Dominique d'Humieres --- I cannot get any ICE with the options and revisions I have tried.

[Bug fortran/89492] [9 Regression] Endless compilation of an invalid TRANSFER after r269177

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89492 --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Can you please verify that your testcases work? With the patch I get pr34202_red.f90:8:54: 8 |write(*,*) transfer(transfer([1],[bug4()]),[1],size[1]) |

[Bug fortran/43210] Initializer of huge static arrays should be improved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43210 --- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > This is definitely an area where improvement would be quite helpful - > our performance there is abysmal. Compiling the test on my laptop takes less than 3s!

[Bug fortran/43210] Initializer of huge static arrays should be improved

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43210 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/70149] [F08] Character pointer initialization causes ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70149 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/31392] [meta-bug] gfortran problems with initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31392 Bug 31392 depends on bug 70149, which changed state. Bug 70149 Summary: [F08] Character pointer initialization causes ICE https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70149 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug fortran/68241] [meta-bug] [F03] Deferred-length character

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241 Bug 68241 depends on bug 70149, which changed state. Bug 70149 Summary: [F08] Character pointer initialization causes ICE https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70149 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug fortran/71544] gfortran compiler optimization bug when dealing with c-style pointers

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71544 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added CC||relliott at umn dot edu --- Comme

[Bug fortran/71412] [F03] iso_c_bindings and optimization interaction bug

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71412 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/71935] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE is_c_interoperable(): gfc_simplify_expr failed

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71935 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/89282] Garbage arithmetics results in fortran with -O3 and overloaded operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89282 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/89496] [9 Regression] gcc/fortran/trans-types.c:3015:9: runtime error: member access within null pointer of type 'struct gfc_formal_arglist'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89496 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Prior

[Bug fortran/89492] [9 Regression] Endless compilation of an invalid TRANSFER after r269177

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89492 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/89492] New: [9 Regression] Endless compilation of an invalid TRANSFER after r269177

Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr CC: anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- As reported at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2019-02/msg00198.html, after revision

[Bug libfortran/89274] Inconsistent list directed output of INTEGER(16)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89274 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/88117] [9 Regression] ICE in gimplify_var_or_parm_decl, at gimplify.c:2697

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88117 --- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres --- The ICE is now gone, but I get segmentation fault at run time. If I comment the line z = (z) I get ab Program received signal SIGSEGV: Segmentation fault - invalid memory reference. Is this e

[Bug fortran/89451] [9 Regression] FAIL: gfortran.dg/pr79315.f90 -O (internal compiler error)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89451 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/61765] [7/8/9 Regression] [F03] Rejects valid BIND(C) ENTRY

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61765 --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres --- For the record, after revision r267902 the test in pr34500 comment 0 gives an ICE instead of a wrong error (see pr34500 comment 6).

[Bug libfortran/52879] Pathological reseeding of PRNG generator genernates poor sequence

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52879 --- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > I think the current implementation has a decent protection against bad seeds, > so lets close this as fixed. The least I can say is that I am not convinced about the "decent protection".

[Bug fortran/89366] Fails to compile BIND(C) interface with assumed-length character argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89366 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 --- Comment #6 from Dominique

[Bug fortran/89348] Fortran Command Options documentation fixes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89348 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5

[Bug fortran/88117] [9 Regression] ICE in gimplify_var_or_parm_decl, at gimplify.c:2697

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88117 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org Kno

[Bug fortran/89365] Inquiry functions for assumed rank objects fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|NEW

[Bug fortran/89431] CPP integer macros not defined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89431 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres --- program test use iso_fortran_env implicit none write(*,*) integer_kinds #ifdef __GFC_INT_1__ write(*,*) "__GFC_INT_1__ defined" #else write(*,*) "__GFC_INT_1__ undefined" #endif #ifdef __GFC_

[Bug fortran/89431] CPP integer macros not defined

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89431 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/89366] Fails to compile BIND(C) interface with assumed-length character argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89366 --- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Fortran 2018 FDIS section 18.3.6, para 2, item 5, bullet 2: On my draft it is probably 18.3.7 Interoperability of procedures and procedure interfaces For character(kind=c_char,len=:), allocat

[Bug fortran/46496] Missing strlen check / interop warnings with BIND(C) and non-C_* kinds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46496 --- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres --- b) -Wno-c-binding-type silences the warnings related to C binding. It remains in this PR the missed warnings in d) and e).

[Bug fortran/89366] Fails to compile BIND(C) interface with assumed-length character argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89366 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/89348] Fortran Command Options documentation fixes

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89348 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/89385] Incorrect members of C descriptor for an allocatable object

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89385 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/89365] Inquiry functions for assumed rank objects fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365 --- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > I agree with Harald's assessment. The test case as delivered by me > is indeed incorrectly written for the POINTER and ALLOCATABLE cases, > in both of which I believe the bounds should be taken from

[Bug fortran/89413] [PDT] ICE in resolve_fl_derived, at fortran/resolve.c:14392

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89413 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/89365] Inquiry functions for assumed rank objects fail

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/60144] Misleading error message when missing "then" after "if" and "else if"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60144 --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres --- I don't understand the goal of the block (line 1651 of gcc/fortran/match.c) /* The gfc_match_assignment() above may have returned a MATCH_NO where the assignment was to a named constant. Check

[Bug fortran/83118] [7/8/9 Regression] Bad intrinsic assignment of class(*) array component of derived type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83118 --- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres --- Compiling the reduced test type :: any_vector class(*), allocatable :: v(:) end type type(any_vector) :: x, y x%v = ['foo','bar'] end with -fsanitize=address gives ==54286==ERROR: AddressSanitize

[Bug fortran/89388] Component selection for assumed-size DT array

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89388 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/89363] RANK incorrect for unallocated allocatable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89363 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/89384] [9 Regression] CONTIGUOUS dummy argument in BIND(C) interface incorrect when actual is non-contiguous

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89384 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/68649] [7/8/9 Regression] note: code may be misoptimized unless -fno-strict-aliasing is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68649 --- Comment #26 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > > The warnings are gone between revisions r265814 and r265942. > > I can confirm that. > So, are there objections to just committing a test case and > closing this bug? My (shallow) understanding

[Bug fortran/89375] fortran/expr.c:4723:5: warning: logical ‘or’ of equal expressions [-Wlogical-op]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89375 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/89364] Assumed rank object with incorrect values for shape and bounds

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89364 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/89374] gfortran does not respect privacy of types

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89374 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/70149] [F08] Character pointer initialization causes ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70149 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #13 from Domi

[Bug fortran/88248] [F18] Bogus warning about obsolescent feature: Labeled DO statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88248 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/71880] pointer to allocatable character

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71880 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added CC||clange001 at gmail dot com --- Co

[Bug fortran/68241] [meta-bug] [F03] Deferred-length character

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68241 Bug 68241 depends on bug 89352, which changed state. Bug 89352 Summary: Deferred length character array pointer error https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89352 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug fortran/89352] Deferred length character array pointer error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89352 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/89344] uncaught programmer error: polymorphic variable is INTENT(IN) but assigned to without error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89344 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug ada/89333] [9 Regression] FAIL: gnat.dg/vect*.adb on darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89333 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code Sta

[Bug ada/89333] New: [9 Regression] FAIL: gnat.dg/vect*.adb on darwin

Component: ada Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr CC: ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu.org, iains at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Between revisions and the following ADA tests have started to fail: FAIL: gnat.dg/vect1.adb 3

[Bug fortran/89291] internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_use_stmts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89291 --- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Installed gcc-5.5.0 and built the identical WRF version. > > No ICE encountered with 5.5.0. Then if you get an ICE with 7.4, it a regression. Did you try 8.2 or trunk. > Contacted NCAR, the provid

[Bug fortran/78983] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE with CAF-DT with allocatable member

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78983 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/83700] [Meta-bug] Fortran Coarray issues

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83700 Bug 83700 depends on bug 78983, which changed state. Bug 78983 Summary: [7/8/9 Regression] ICE with CAF-DT with allocatable member https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78983 What|Removed |Added -

[Bug fortran/89286] Intrinsic sign and GNU Extension

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89286 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/89291] internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_use_stmts

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89291 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/89282] Garbage arithmetics results in fortran with -O3 and overloaded operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89282 --- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Maybe it's been solved as part of other bugs I couldn't find by searching? I don't think it is worth the effort to find when this has been fixed. I'll commit your test and close the PR as FIXED.

[Bug fortran/89282] Garbage arithmetics results in fortran with -O3 and overloaded operators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89282 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/49565] character(kind=4) is emitted as DW_ATE_unsigned, not DW_ATE_unsigned_char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49565 --- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > I'd like some informed feedback on this before closing. Me too, but what be done when I don't get any feedback over years?

[Bug fortran/53694] [OOP] GENERIC type-bound procs should be available without part-ref syntax

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53694 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/49565] character(kind=4) is emitted as DW_ATE_unsigned, not DW_ATE_unsigned_char

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49565 --- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Any progress after two years and a half? Any progress after two and a half more years? Shouldn't this PR be closed as FIXED (AFAIU this is not a fortran bug).

[Bug fortran/51591] Strange output from STOP statement in OpenMP region

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51591 --- Comment #6 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Nay progress after more than two years? No progress after more than three more years?

[Bug fortran/83218] gforttran command fails to compile if fortran file is present inside folder "%+@"

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83218 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/87337] Internal compiler error on coarrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87337 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/61073] -fcheck='do' leads to twice the amount of GDB steps in a do loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61073 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/56581] Segfault when reading source file which starts with a byte-order mark (-cpp works)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56581 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/56581] Segfault when reading source file which starts with a byte-order mark (-cpp works)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56581 --- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres --- AFAIU "Unicode byte-order marker" is not part of the Fortran character set and I think the test starting with it is invalid. No feedback, closing as INVALID.

[Bug fortran/51637] Add compile-time error if array is too large

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51637 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libfortran/89274] Inconsistent list directed output of INTEGER(16)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89274 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|UNCONFIRMED

[Bug libfortran/89274] New: Inconsistent list directed output of INTEGER(16)

: libfortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr CC: jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- The following test integer(8) :: i(2) integer(16) :: j(2) i = -huge(1) print *, i i = -huge(1_8) print *, i j = huge(1

[Bug fortran/89266] ICE with TRANSFER of len=0 character array constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/81552] -finit-integer=n is restricted to 32-bit INTEGER.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81552 --- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > > IMO this PR should be closed as WONTFIX. > > Or document it - a single sentence should be enough. Well the following patch (untested) "fixes" this PR: --- ../_clean/gcc/fortran/gfortran.h2019

[Bug fortran/81552] -finit-integer=n is restricted to 32-bit INTEGER.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81552 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #2 from Domin

[Bug fortran/68940] -Wno-error=compare-reals not working

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68940 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug target/69061] Huge (~7GB of them) Static arrays are not fully usable on Darwin

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69061 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/89236] Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89236 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5 Status|WAITING

[Bug fortran/52789] gfortran sets -Wunused-parameter in the C sense as well as the Fortran sense

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52789 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug fortran/89240] Discrepancy in the return kind of MAX and MIN between all literal input parameters and input parameters that are variables

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89240 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/89236] Intrinsic documentation changes for intrinsics affected by GNU extension

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89236 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/89219] ICE with derived type I/O

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89219 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/84006] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in storage_size() with CLASS entity

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84006 --- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Looks valid to me. > > F2018, 16.9.184 STORAGE_SIZE (A [, KIND]) > > 3 Arguments. > A shall be a data object of any type. If it is polymorphic it shall not > be an undefined pointer. If it is unlimit

[Bug fortran/50410] [7/8/9 Regression] ICE in record_reference, pointer variable in data statement

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50410 --- Comment #33 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Some of the tests in this PR are fixed by the patch at > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2019-01/msg00065.html Namely the original test does not ICE after r267820.

[Bug fortran/36383] -std=95: Reject public procedure with private derv. type argument

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36383 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING --- Comment #1 from Domin

[Bug fortran/39624] short-list explicit interfaces in generic interfaces if no match is found

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39624 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P5

[Bug fortran/54880] [OOP] ICE in gfc_create_module_variable, at fortran/trans-decl.c:4013

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54880 --- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > The assert is meaningful, it is a bug if something is created > with one context once and then something tries to change that > context to something else. So whatever wants to change that > is doing

[Bug fortran/56850] Diagnostic of REAL*8 is odd: Accepted with -std=f95, -pedantic prints warning only with -std=gnu

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56850 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > Using GCC 4.1 with -std=f95 (but not GCC >=4.3) shows: > real*8 >1 > Error: Nonstandard type declaration REAL*8 at (1) While /opt/gcc/gcc4.3.1/bin/gfortran pr56850_red.f90 -std=f95 does n

[Bug fortran/89204] -floop-interchange has no effect on Fortran code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89204 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed|

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >