[Bug fortran/33686] New: FORALL loop gives wrong result

Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: enok at lysator dot liu dot se GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC target

[Bug fortran/33686] FORALL loop gives wrong result

--- Comment #2 from enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2007-10-08 09:42 --- Do you mean the fact that assignment expressions within a forall loop may be executed in any order? But within a single assignment it seems that the right hand side and any expressions within the left hand side must

[Bug fortran/33354] [4.2 only] MINLOC in combination with SUM gives wrong result

--- Comment #7 from enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2007-09-30 20:56 --- (In reply to comment #6) (In reply to comment #5) I added a testcase for this. Thanks! Can this bug be closed or does anyone feel strongly enough about it to fix it in 4.2? If we can identify which patch

[Bug fortran/33354] New: MINLOC in combination with SUM gives wrong result

: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: enok at lysator dot liu dot se GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org

[Bug fortran/33264] New: lower index bound incorrect after array pointer assignment

: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: enok at lysator dot liu dot se GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33264

[Bug fortran/32150] New: Strangeness when repeating an INTERFACE entity in ONLY clause of USE statement

AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: enok at lysator dot liu dot se GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32150

[Bug fortran/32150] Strangeness when repeating an INTERFACE entity in ONLY clause of USE statement

--- Comment #1 from enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2007-05-30 08:30 --- ... I forgot to state the error message: gfortran412 -c tst.f90 In file tst.f90:12 USE MOD, ONLY : FOO,FOO 1 Error: Symbol 'foo' referenced at (1) not found in module 'mod' -- http

[Bug c++/30924] New: Array of pointer type argument in partial template specialization fails

org ReportedBy: enok at lysator dot liu dot se GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30924

[Bug c++/30924] Array of pointer type argument in partial template specialization fails

--- Comment #1 from enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2007-02-22 10:16 --- I'm unable to create attachments, bugzilla crashes. I have reported the bugzilla bug also to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30924

[Bug fortran/29837] INTERFACE overloading INTENT problem - valid code is rejected

--- Comment #3 from enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2006-11-15 08:06 --- (In reply to comment #2) The trivial workaround is to assign MAXVAL(X) to an integer. Ok, but my real code is more complex. And I think there must be something wrong. If I put an INTENT(IN) variable as X it works

[Bug fortran/29837] New: INTERFACE overloading INTENT problem - valid code is rejected

at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: enok at lysator dot liu dot se GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29837

[Bug fortran/29837] INTERFACE overloading INTENT problem - valid code is rejected

--- Comment #1 from enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2006-11-14 23:14 --- Created an attachment (id=12621) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12621action=view) Small testcase that triggers the compiler bug gfortran4 -c tst.f90 In file tst.f90:22 CALL A(MAXVAL(X),Y

[Bug fortran/28971] ICE: Segmentation fault on valid code

--- Comment #5 from enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2006-09-12 09:15 --- Subject: Re: ICE: Segmentation fault on valid code Yes that's fine with me. I don't have access to the computer where I originally noticed the problem until the end of the week so I haven't been able to try any

[Bug fortran/28971] New: ICE: Segmentation fault on valid code

code Product: gcc Version: 4.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: enok at lysator dot liu dot se GCC build triplet: x86_64

[Bug fortran/28971] ICE: Segmentation fault on valid code

--- Comment #1 from enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2006-09-07 09:31 --- Created an attachment (id=12201) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12201action=view) Valid code snippet that causes ICE gfortran -c tst.f90 tst.f90:0: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault

[Bug fortran/23446] Valid internal subprogram array argument declaration is not accepted.

--- Additional Comments From enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2005-08-18 07:42 --- After some research, I'm pretty sure the rejected code is legal. §734: A specification-expr is a scalar-int-expr Constraint: The scalar-int-expr shall be a restricted expression Since a variable from

[Bug fortran/23446] New: Valid internal subprogram array argument declaration is not accepted.

at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: enok at lysator dot liu dot se CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: 86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: 86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC target triplet: 86_64-unknown-linux-gnu http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id

[Bug fortran/23446] Valid internal subprogram array argument declaration is not accepted.

--- Additional Comments From enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2005-08-17 17:07 --- Created an attachment (id=9521) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9521action=view) Testcase that is accepted by other compilers, but rejected by gfortran. The output from gfortran follows

[Bug fortran/16606] gfortran error with a valid derived type definition

--- Additional Comments From enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2005-06-18 09:08 --- The problem seems to appear with pointer declaration to a derived type with any kind of member initialization. The following code fails too: SUBROUTINE N TYPE T INTEGER :: I = 0 END TYPE T TYPE(T

[Bug fortran/21816] New: gfortran rejects simple, valid code

Version: 4.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: enok at lysator dot liu dot se CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build

[Bug fortran/21816] gfortran rejects simple, valid code

--- Additional Comments From enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2005-05-30 13:00 --- Created an attachment (id=8991) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8991action=view) Testcase with valid code that fails to compile -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21816

[Bug fortran/21816] gfortran rejects simple, valid code

--- Additional Comments From enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2005-05-30 13:02 --- (From update of attachment 8991) MODULE TSTMOD TYPE TTYPE INTEGER, POINTER :: P =NULL() END TYPE TTYPE TYPE(TTYPE), POINTER :: TP END MODULE TSTMOD -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla

[Bug fortran/21816] gfortran rejects simple, valid code

--- Additional Comments From enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2005-05-30 13:05 --- Created an attachment (id=8992) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8992action=view) Corrected testcase Please forget the previous attachment (feel free to remove it if possible) ... _This_

[Bug fortran/16606] gfortran error with a valid derived type definition

--- Additional Comments From enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2005-05-30 13:27 --- If CHARACTER is replaced by INTEGER the result is the same. Thus, it is not CHARACTER type pointers that causes the problem. (In reply to comment #6) *** Bug 21816 has been marked as a duplicate

[Bug fortran/21825] New: Segmentation fault on 2D array initialization with reshape

: normal Priority: P2 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: enok at lysator dot liu dot se CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux

[Bug fortran/21197] New: Fortran array assignment causes ICE

Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: critical Priority: P1 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org ReportedBy: enok at lysator dot liu dot se CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org GCC build triplet: i686-pc-linux-gnu GCC

[Bug fortran/21197] Fortran array assignment causes ICE

--- Additional Comments From enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2005-04-24 23:11 --- Created an attachment (id=8730) -- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8730action=view) Simplified, stripped-down testcase that causes crash. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id

[Bug fortran/21197] ICE in gfc_trans_scalar_assign, at fortran/trans-expr.c:2005

--- Additional Comments From enok at lysator dot liu dot se 2005-04-24 23:22 --- I forgot ... the output of the compiler is: [EMAIL PROTECTED] src]$ gfortran4 -c tst.f90 tst.f90: In function 'MAIN__': tst.f90:7: internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_scalar_assign, at fortran/trans