https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365
--- Comment #9 from Paul Thomas ---
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jun 9 09:43:37 2019
New Revision: 272090
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=272090=gcc=rev
Log:
2019-06-09 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/89365
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365
--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #7)
> > I agree with the analysis of the standard and will add the corrected
> > testcase
> > to the testsuite.
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> Can you please extend the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|NEW
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365
Paul Thomas changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365
--- Comment #5 from Bader at lrz dot de ---
The corrected test case passes all tests, so the PR can be closed. Sorry for
the noise.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365
--- Comment #4 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> I agree with Harald's assessment. The test case as delivered by me
> is indeed incorrectly written for the POINTER and ALLOCATABLE cases,
> in both of which I believe the bounds should be taken from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365
--- Comment #3 from Bader at lrz dot de ---
I agree with Harald's assessment. The test case as delivered by me is indeed
incorrectly written for the POINTER and ALLOCATABLE cases, in both of which I
believe the bounds should be taken from the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #2
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89365
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
10 matches
Mail list logo
