https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.9.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-09 10:03:06 UTC ---
Fortunately there is a simple workaround: Declaring the procedure pointer as
procedure(ff), pointer :: f = ff
makes the segfault go away. The
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-09 10:08:23 UTC ---
Actually I wonder whether the test case is really valid. The problem is: When
declaring the procedure pointer without an interface, we don't know which kind
of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-09 10:17:16 UTC ---
One can play the same game with scalars, where the situation is even more
severe:
module t
type :: nc
integer :: n = 1
end type nc
contains
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Benson abensonca at gmail dot com 2013-02-09
16:50:54 UTC ---
On the test case in comment 2, ifort v11.1 reports:
ifort -o bug.exe bug.F90
bug.F90(23): error #6592: This symbol must be a defined parameter, an
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-09 16:58:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #8)
On the test case in comment 2,
comment 1?
ifort v11.1 reports:
ifort -o bug.exe bug.F90
bug.F90(23): error #6592: This
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
--- Comment #10 from Andrew Benson abensonca at gmail dot com 2013-02-09
17:01:22 UTC ---
You're right - comment 1.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Benson abensonca at gmail dot com 2013-02-09
17:06:18 UTC ---
Thanks for figuring out the problem here. When I specify an interface for the
procedure pointer in the original code that I derived the test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56261
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-02-09 18:25:33 UTC ---
I just noticed that there is already related diagnostics in resolve.c
(resolve_global_procedure):
/* F2003, 12.3.1.1 (2d); F2008, 12.4.2.2 (2e) */
14 matches
Mail list logo
