https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70071
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70071
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Thu Jul 6 19:49:33 2017
New Revision: 250039
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250039&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-07-06 Harald Anlauf
PR fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81304
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Bogus warning with |[5/6/7/8 Regression] Bogus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81304
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic, openmp
Known
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Consider this minimal test case:
program bogus_warning
integer :: i
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80983
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri Jun 16 10:15:42 2017
New Revision: 249243
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249243&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-06-16 Janus Weil
PR fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80983
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80983
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Thu Jun 15 21:17:48 2017
New Revision: 249227
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249227&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-06-15 Janus Weil
PR fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81093
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3)
> > ! wrong result
> > write(*,*) gen_data%mydata(:)%data1(1), gen_data%mydata(:)%data1(2)
>
> As said before I am no
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81093
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81093
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Confirmed. Slightly reduced test case:
program test
implicit none
type data_type1
integer, dimension(2) :: data1 = (/1,2/)
end type
type, extends(data_type1) :: data_type2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80983
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70601
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70601
--- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri Jun 9 19:23:48 2017
New Revision: 249073
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249073&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-06-09 Janus Weil
Backport fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70601
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|7.2 |5.5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70601
--- Comment #13 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri Jun 9 18:10:48 2017
New Revision: 249067
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249067&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-06-09 Janus Weil
Backport fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70601
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri Jun 9 17:45:53 2017
New Revision: 249066
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=249066&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-06-09 Janus Weil
Backport fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70601
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The ICE has been fixed on (8-)trunk. Backports pending.
(In reply to janus from comment #7)
> However, we probably still need to deal with PPCs that have allocatable
> function results.
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80983
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
Known to fail
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Follow-up to PR 70601 ...
The following program is compiled fine by gfortran, but exhibits a memory leak
on the PPC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70601
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Mon Jun 5 14:43:01 2017
New Revision: 248878
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248878&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-06-05 Janus Weil
PR fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Mon Jun 5 09:31:32 2017
New Revision: 248873
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248873&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-06-05 Janus Weil
Backport fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79396
--- Comment #18 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Seems like the backport to 5-branch is still missing here ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Mon May 22 17:08:24 2017
New Revision: 248341
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=248341&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-22 Janus Weil
PR fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #9)
> (In reply to janus from comment #8)
> > This shows one ICE in the testsuite:
> >
> > FAIL: gfortran.dg/typebound_proc_32.f90 -
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #5)
> This rather simple patch fixes the ICE on trunk:
>
> Index: gcc/fortran/
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #6)
> I just verified that reverting the class.c parts of r241450 fixes the ICE as
> well. It does not show any failures on the select_type_* test cases
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #4)
> I actually think that r241450 might be more relevant here than r241403 (in
> particular since it messes with gfc_find_derived_vtab).
I just verifie
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I have investigated a bit on the origin of the problem, and it seems that it is
related to the vtype symbols not being resolved properly (and the TBP component
having the type BT_UNKNOWN although
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #3)
> Revision r241395+patch (2016-10-21) is OK, r241433+patch (2016-10-21) gives
> the ICE. AFAICT the only possible revision is the range
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80766
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336
Bug 37336 depends on bug 79311, which changed state.
Bug 79311 Summary: [OOP] ICE in generate_finalization_wrapper, at
fortran/class.c:1992
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79311
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79311
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79311
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Tue May 9 20:55:38 2017
New Revision: 247818
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247818&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-09 Janus Weil
PR fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79311
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #6)
> The regtest went pretty well, although I'm seeing these three failures:
>
> FAIL: gfortran.dg/coarray_lock_7.f90 -O scan-tree-dump-times or
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79311
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #5)
> This draft patch fixes the ICE on comment 0 and comment 4:
>
> [..]
>
> Regtesting now ...
The regtest went pretty well, although I'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79311
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79311
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477
--- Comment #20 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #19)
> And IIRC we even use the finalization
> wrapper for deallocating polymorphic variables in other cases (even if they
> have no actual FINAL procedu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|8.0 |7.2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68800
Bug 68800 depends on bug 80121, which changed state.
Bug 80121 Summary: Memory leak with derived-type intent(out) argument
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
--- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri May 5 21:00:53 2017
New Revision: 247662
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247662&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-05 Janus Weil
Backport fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri May 5 20:09:20 2017
New Revision: 247655
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247655&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-05 Janus Weil
Backport fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80291
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|7.2 |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66366
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|7.2 |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77961
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|7.2 |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78798
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|7.2 |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78009
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|7.2 |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56691
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|7.2 |8.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80524
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #3)
> I think this depends a lot on the compiler implementation.
I don't actually think the calling of finalization routines is supposed to
depen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed on trunk plus the 5 and 6 branches so far. Will apply to the 7-branch
once it reopens.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Mon May 1 10:51:22 2017
New Revision: 247435
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247435&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-01 Janus Weil
Backport fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Mon May 1 09:56:52 2017
New Revision: 247430
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247430&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-05-01 Janus Weil
Backport fr
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
Carry-over from PR 80121 comment 7:
> > In trans-decl.c ther
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80545
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> I suggest to enable them only for C family languages (I notice the options
> do not use EnabledBy()).
I guess that would also fix the bogus w
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79929
--- Comment #17 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Sidenote: Apparently disabling such warnings for Fortran code is not possible.
$ gfortran-8 c3.f90 -c -O2 -Wno-stringop-overflow
gives me:
f951: Warning: command line option ‘-Wstringop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477
--- Comment #18 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com from comment #16)
> The attached does what you want to the testcase. For CLASS objects, it
> is the data that has to be copied to a variable, tha
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477
--- Comment #17 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Hi Paul,
(In reply to paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com from comment #16)
> The attached does what you want to the testcase. For CLASS objects, it
> is the data that has to be copied to a va
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477
--- Comment #14 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com from comment #11)
> I'll take a look tonight. I believe, without the source in front of me, that
>
> s/gfc_add_expr_to_block (&p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
--- Comment #13 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Mon Apr 24 20:44:14 2017
New Revision: 247115
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247115&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-22 Janus Weil
PR fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |8.0
--- Comment #12 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paul.vandelst at noaa dot gov
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68800
Bug 68800 depends on bug 63473, which changed state.
Bug 63473 Summary: Memory leak with ALLOCATABLE, INTENT(OUT) dummy arguments.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63473
What|Removed |Added
-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63473
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Sun Apr 23 08:26:50 2017
New Revision: 247083
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247083&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-22 Janus Weil
PR fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Stefano Zaghi from comment #6)
> As I tried to clarify to Steve, mine was absolutely not a polemic question:
No offense taken. Asking questions is not a crime ;)
> What I mea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68800
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Btw, I think this is a duplicate of PR 63473.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63473
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #6)
> Seems to work now. FIXED?
I still see it with all recent gfortran versions (5,6,7,trunk).
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Stefano Zaghi from comment #2)
> I read that the other bug report is dated 2014: can I conclude that such a
> bug will need a long time to be fixed?
Not necessarily. It just
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #3)
> Confirmed. Here is the most reduced test case I could construct from your
> original example:
-fdump-tree-original shows the following dump for thi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80440
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80477
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
--- Comment #26 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri Apr 21 21:37:16 2017
New Revision: 247071
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247071&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-21 Janus Weil
Backport fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
--- Comment #25 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri Apr 21 21:11:22 2017
New Revision: 247070
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247070&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-21 Janus Weil
Backport fr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri Apr 21 20:47:12 2017
New Revision: 247069
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=247069&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-21 Janus Weil
PR fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #6)
> (In reply to janus from comment #5)
> > In trans-decl.c there is a function called 'init_intent_out_dt', which takes
> > care of dea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
--- Comment #24 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jürgen Reuter from comment #23)
> Our code and testsuite now works without problems when using -fcheck=all.
> Seems also no regressions on our side.
Thanks for the feedback!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #5)
> In trans-decl.c there is a function called 'init_intent_out_dt', which takes
> care of deallocating the allocatable components of intent(o
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
In trans-decl.c there is a function called 'init_intent_out_dt', which takes
care of deallocating the allocatable components of intent(out) derived-type
dummies. However, it has a comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80440
--- Comment #1 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
See also the discussion starting at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2017-04/msg00039.html
find_symtree_for_symbol was originally introduced in r121824 for PR 30554.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Producing a dump via -fdump-tree-original shows what's going on in the case of
comment #3, namely: 'e' is being deallocated before being passed to 's1':
if (
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80121
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79685
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[5/6/7 Regression] bogus|[5/6/7 Regression] [OOP
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #3)
> Regtesting now ...
Regtest completed successfully ...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80291
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to snowfed from comment #7)
> In the slightly reduced version of the test case cell is not allocated when
> reaching associate structure. Maybe, allocate(cell) is worth being added.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
--- Comment #21 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Fri Apr 14 21:17:52 2017
New Revision: 246934
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=246934&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2017-04-14 Janus Weil
PR fortr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80392
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Known
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80361
--- Comment #18 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #17)
> (In reply to janus from comment #16)
> > This seems to be sufficient to fix the runtime error on the reduced test
> > case in comment #13:
&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67505
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The patch in PR 80361 comment 16 fixes the error.
501 - 600 of 3414 matches
Mail list logo
