--- Comment #1 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2006-11-13 07:42
---
Isn't this going to be allowed in F2008? (Perhaps it already is in F2003 --
I'm too lazy to check.) We should print an error message if strict standard
conformance is requested, but since it is going to be valid
: minor
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28660
--- Comment #2 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2006-08-09 10:54
---
(In reply to comment #1)
Actually this is worse than what is said here, this is wrong code. In a
prerelease of 4.1.0, we allocate r after we allocate x so the size of x is not
know at the time we allocate r
--- Comment #5 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-27 09:25
---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-10/msg00587.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24503
--- Comment #2 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-24 12:53
---
(In reply to comment #1)
Here is what I get with the mainline of GCC:
In file t.f90:12
PUBLIC :: s_to_c
1
Error: 'string' is a PRIVATE type and cannot be a dummy argument of 's_to_c',
which
--- Comment #2 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-21 12:03
---
(In reply to comment #0)
It reminds me a bit of bug 16606 but is different as the compiler crashes.
It's indeed basically the same problem as in PR 16606; we assign a default
initializer to variables of derived
--- Comment #3 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-21 14:57
---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-10/msg00481.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24426
--- Comment #6 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-18 20:50
---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg01079.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21625
--- Comment #5 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-17 13:14
---
Working on a patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21625
--- Comment #2 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-13 14:49
---
Patch posted here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-10/msg00292.html
--
erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-12 12:00
---
*** Bug 23924 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-12 12:00
---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 21625 ***
--
erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-12 12:09
---
I think that this PR is just a symptom of a more general problem: components
(of any kind) of a derived type are not initialized when a pointer/allocatable
variable of derived type is allocated. Also see PR 23924
--- Comment #4 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-12 12:54
---
(In reply to comment #3)
Testing a patch.
Patch posted here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-10/msg00229.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24245
--- Comment #3 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-11 18:11
---
Testing a patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24245
Version: 4.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24245
--- Comment #1 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-06 20:38
---
I think the ICE comes from dump-parse-tree.c/show_symtree() at the line
gfc_status ( from namespace %s, st-n.sym-ns-proc_name-name);
because st-n.sym-ns-proc_name is NULL for st-n.sym = 'hu'.
--
http
--- Comment #2 from erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-10-05 21:38
---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-10/msg00171.html
--
erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-09-29
19:48 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Working on a patch.
Turned out to be much more work than I first thought. I'll leave it for now.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20541
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-09-27
15:21 ---
Working on a patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20541
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-09-21
20:36 ---
Patch posted to the mailing list here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg01359.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23843
: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23924
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-09-16
21:59 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Hmm, I get:
In file t.f90:2
type t
1
Error: Pointer assignment target is neither TARGET nor POINTER at (1)
Oh! I'm terribly sorry; I used a locally modifieded
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-09-16
23:07 ---
Patch posted to mailinglist:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg01032.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15975
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-09-16
23:08 ---
Patch posted to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-09/msg01032.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16606
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-09-06
21:10 ---
With my patch, the reduced testcase by Tobi compiles, but this slightly longer
testcase doesn't:
$ cat bug7.f90
SUBROUTINE A(p,LEN)
CHARACTER(LEN=LEN), DIMENSION(:), POINTER :: p
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-09-02
11:56 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
According to Erik Richard's patch for PR15326 fixes one of those two bugs (I
assume the latter?), adding the dependency so that we will keep track of this.
Yes, it's the latter
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-08-30
20:28 ---
Hmm ... With current version of gfortran (4.1.0 20050830), the reduced testcase
by Tobias gives the error message
bug.f90: In function 'a':
bug.f90:3: internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_deferred_array
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-08-23
19:54 ---
A patch for this bug has been posted to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-08/msg00406.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-07-28
09:06 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
interfaces. This brings me to a question: what is a named interface? I
This is a nameless interface, isn't it?
module snafu
interface
subroutine really_snafu
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-07-28
11:46 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
A discussion on the mailing list on this bug here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-06/msg00485.html
Sorry about the above. That mailing list discussion is about a different
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-07-28
11:50 ---
This bug has been briefly discussed on the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-06/msg00485.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19925
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-07-27
13:00 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Subject: Re: interface body has incorrect scope
Paul, do you have any idea what find_special could be intended for? It seems
obvious that it does the wrong thing in the case
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-07-11
19:52 ---
Erik,
Have you checked the parse tree for this? It looks OK, from a very
casual look, but the parse tree would be the clincher.
After comments from Tobi I posted a new patch here:
http
--- Additional Comments From erik dot edelmann at iki dot fi 2005-07-01
09:49 ---
A discussion on the mailing list on this bug here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-06/msg00485.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22146
35 matches
Mail list logo
