--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.1.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24554
--- Comment #7 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-01-22 01:06 ---
Closing as fixed. The (duplicate?) PR pointed to by Richard has
been fixed, and the originator of this bug report has not supplied
the code as requested by Andrew on 10/30/05.
--
kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org chang
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-30 17:55 ---
Can you attach the source?
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from eedelman at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-28 11:18
---
(In reply to comment #4)
> I don't understand what is the exact solution to my problem.
Nobody has said there is a solution at the moment. When Richard Guenther
marked this PR as RESOLVED, DUPLICATE, it didn't m
--- Comment #4 from mabdallah at unido-ichet dot org 2005-10-28 06:09
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Because if you look in that BUGs audit-trail we have
>
> The error message is
>
> city3s.f:0: internal compiler error: in gfc_assign_data_value, at
> fortran/data.c:319
>
> given t
--- Comment #3 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-27 12:33 ---
Because if you look in that BUGs audit-trail we have
The error message is
city3s.f:0: internal compiler error: in gfc_assign_data_value, at
fortran/data.c:319
given the detailled information in this (24554) bug
--- Comment #2 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-27 11:26 ---
Huh, how can this ICE be a duplicate of an accepts-invalid bug??
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24554
--- Comment #1 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-27 11:18 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 17737 ***
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
