--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gmx dot de 2006-12-21 08:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=12829)
-- (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12829action=view)
Demo code for gfc_todo
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30273
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu dot
|
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-21 15:44 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Changing the FORALL to a DO loop is a workaround. Something strange is
happening in the forall assignment.
Thanks
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30273
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-21 16:05 ---
Harald,
I found it in a couple of minutes; the dependency analysis does not know about
NULL(), decides the worst and makes a mess of it!
Index: gcc/fortran/dependency.c
--- Comment #4 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-12-21 19:15 ---
Subject: Bug number PR30273
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-12/msg01519.html
--
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-21 19:56 ---
Subject: Bug 30273
Author: pault
Date: Thu Dec 21 19:56:34 2006
New Revision: 120117
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=120117
Log:
2006-12-21 Paul Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-21 20:54 ---
Subject: Bug 30273
Author: pault
Date: Thu Dec 21 20:54:40 2006
New Revision: 120118
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=120118
Log:
2006-12-21 Paul Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PR
