--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-13 17:23
---
Patch here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2005-03/msg00220.html
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-13
18:37 ---
Subject: Bug 20323
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-13 18:37:17
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: ChangeLog resolve.c
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-13
18:40 ---
Subject: Bug 20323
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-13 18:40:29
Modified files:
gcc/fortran:
--- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-13 18:42
---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20323
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed||1
Keywords|
--- Additional Comments From Thomas dot Koenig at online dot de 2005-03-09
16:01 ---
The complaint is a segfault at runtime when
you actually want to do anything with the
string whose length depends on a missing
optional argument. This isn't too bad (the
same thing happens if you
--- Additional Comments From tow21 at cam dot ac dot uk 2005-03-09 16:11
---
(In reply to comment #1)
The complaint is a segfault at runtime when
you actually want to do anything with the
string whose length depends on a missing
optional argument. This isn't too bad (the
