[Bug fortran/53259] New: [OOP] virtual call to type bound procedure calls base, not extension?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53259 Bug #: 53259 Summary: [OOP] virtual call to type bound procedure calls base, not extension? Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.8.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: wrong-code Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: dfra...@gcc.gnu.org CC: ja...@gcc.gnu.org The testcase below strangely calls a_hook, but I'd expect b_hook to be called? For what it's worth, an equivalent testcase in C++ calls b_hook ... $ gfortran hook.f90 ./a.out hook: a [gfortran 4.8 r186145; info provided by Andrew Benson] See also the thread started here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2012-05/msg00029.html This may be related to PR53255 (but the workaround given there does not seem to work. Didn't test the patch yet). Testcase: $ cat hook.f90 MODULE m TYPE :: a CONTAINS PROCEDURE :: worker = a_worker PROCEDURE :: hook = a_hook END TYPE TYPE, extends(a) :: b CONTAINS PROCEDURE :: worker = b_worker PROCEDURE :: hook = b_hook END TYPE CONTAINS SUBROUTINE a_worker(this) CLASS(a), INTENT(in) :: this CALL this%hook() END SUBROUTINE SUBROUTINE a_hook(this) CLASS(a), INTENT(in) :: this print *, hook: a ! This is wrongly(?) called. END SUBROUTINE SUBROUTINE b_worker(this) CLASS(b), INTENT(in) :: this ! do some extra work, then call the worker of the base class, ! expect to come back to b_hook later ... CALL this%a%worker() END SUBROUTINE SUBROUTINE b_hook(this) CLASS(b), INTENT(in) :: this print *, hook: b END SUBROUTINE END MODULE USE m TYPE(b) :: obj CALL obj%worker() END
[Bug fortran/50438] New: proc pointer to subroutine in structure constructors
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50438 Bug #: 50438 Summary: proc pointer to subroutine in structure constructors Classification: Unclassified Product: gcc Version: 4.7.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Keywords: rejects-valid Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: dfra...@gcc.gnu.org CC: ja...@gcc.gnu.org [http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-09/msg00080.html] The example below should be valid but is currently rejected: $ cat procpointer.f90 IMPLICIT NONE TYPE :: a PROCEDURE(proc), POINTER, NOPASS :: p END TYPE ABSTRACT INTERFACE SUBROUTINE proc END SUBROUTINE END INTERFACE TYPE(a), PARAMETER :: aa = a(aproc) ! --- CONTAINS SUBROUTINE aproc END SUBROUTINE END $ gfortran-svn -Wall -W -fimplicit-none procpointer.f90 TYPE(a), PARAMETER :: aa = a(aproc) ! --- 1 Error: Symbol 'aproc' at (1) has no IMPLICIT type $ gfortran-svn -v gcc version 4.7.0 20110915 (experimental) (GCC)
[Bug fortran/49438] error during make
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49438 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2011.07.24 18:41:44 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #7 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 18:41:44 UTC --- Set to waiting. Close if no additional info shows up in a reasonable time frame.
[Bug fortran/49683] The system cannot execute the specified program
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49683 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2011.07.24 18:43:02 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 18:43:02 UTC --- Set to waiting. Close soon if no further information shows up.
[Bug fortran/38913] Fortran does not set TYPE_CANONICAL properly
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38913 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #22 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 18:47:19 UTC --- Closing according to comments #19 and #20.
[Bug fortran/40766] this fortran program is too slow
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40766 --- Comment #21 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 18:49:19 UTC --- One year down. Did anything happen here?
[Bug fortran/44352] ICE in string_to_single_character
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44352 --- Comment #15 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 18:51:30 UTC --- Was this ever backported? Should it still be backported?
[Bug fortran/46703] Wrong I/O output (only) when running under valgrind
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46703 --- Comment #4 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 18:53:21 UTC --- Any news here? May this report be closed?
[Bug fortran/49297] ICE gfc_conv_component_ref, at fortran/trans-expr.c:268 when compiling molcas7.6
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49297 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #6 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 18:56:57 UTC --- No further feedback for six weeks. As-is, there's nothing gfortran developers can do. Closing as invalid.
[Bug fortran/49501] support ATTRIBUTES ALIGN in gfortran
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49501 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 19:00:26 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) Note that Bug #41209 (which requests even more complete ATTRIBUTE support, including ALIGN) depends on this one. This PR only asks for a special case of the cited report. Suggest to close as dupe of #41209.
[Bug fortran/49271] Compiler crashed and asked me to submit a report
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49271 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2011.07.24 19:03:42 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #11 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 19:03:42 UTC --- Any news here? Set to waiting, to be closed soon if no additional info is provided.
[Bug fortran/49149] Dependency autogeneration with `-M` rendered useless by requiring .mod files
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49149 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2011.07.24 19:05:43 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 19:05:43 UTC --- Just a thought: did you try to pass '-E' (preprocess only) as well?
[Bug fortran/49138] Add /usr/include/fortran/{,gcc-version} to the file/module search path
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49138 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 19:06:55 UTC --- Isn't this the same as #35707?
[Bug fortran/48864] -Ofast should imply -fno-protect-parens
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48864 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 19:09:12 UTC --- Tobias, anything else to do here? Can this be closed?
[Bug fortran/48858] Incorrect error for same binding label on two generic interface specifics
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48858 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 19:18:48 UTC --- Tobias, did comment #4/#5 implement #35161?
[Bug fortran/48718] gfortran crash
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48718 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2011.07.24 19:21:52 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #3 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 19:21:52 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) Works with -fno-realloc-lhs -- thus, it should be one of the recently fixed 4.6/4.7 regressions. Can this be closed, then?
[Bug fortran/47720] problems with makefile dependency generation using -M
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47720 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #6 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 19:35:42 UTC --- See also #44526 (I think there's another related PR somewhere, can't find it right now). The -cpp is required as the C preprocesor and libcpp are being used to generate the Makefile dependencies. As you probably know, in itself Fortran doesn't really have a concept of a preprocessor.
[Bug fortran/49627] NINT(x,16) doesn't work (at all, ever, I don't think)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49627 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Severity|blocker |normal --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 20:03:56 UTC --- Fortran bugs are never blockers.
[Bug fortran/49271] Compiler crashed and asked me to submit a report
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49271 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #13 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-07-24 22:14:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #12) [...] the problem went away. Closing accordingly.
[Bug fortran/47267] array constructor causing long compile times
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47267 --- Comment #5 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-02-07 00:34:00 UTC --- Jerry, good luck with that one - I'm pretty sure that this is at least implicitly related to PR42189. Can of Pandoras's Worms ahead :)
[Bug libfortran/47196] --disable-libquadmath breaks bootstrap in libgfortran (quadmath_weak.h not found)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47196 --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-07 12:44:17 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) c) Build libquadmath but no Fortran REAL(16) support If one wants to save a few KiB for Fortran but wants to us libquadmath, e.g, with C/C++ This would be --enable-libquadmath --disable-libquadmath-support? Why should disable-libquadmath-support affect Fortran only (besides that the docs say so)? I'd read this as build libquadmath, but disable any usage within gcc. d) Don't build libquadmath, but support libquadmath-based REAL(16) in gfortran Useful only if the system has already a (compatible) libquadmath installation libgfortran then links -lquadmath but the user/builder has to make sure that it is in the -I and the -L paths. I think it would make much more sense to set the the libquadmath-support flag implicitly in most cases, i.e. instead of the currently necessary --disable-libquadmath --disable-libquadmath-support a simple --disable-libquadmath to turn off everything related to libquadmath would do. If one does not want to build libquadmath of gcc but have libquadmath support for any(!) language, library and headers to be user supplied, then use --disable-libquadmath --enable-libquadmath-support to override the implicit setting of --enable-libquadmath-support. Wouldn't that be much more intuitive and easier for the users?
[Bug fortran/33117] Improve error message for generic interface with subroutines functions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33117 --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-06 16:08:28 UTC --- Author: dfranke Date: Thu Jan 6 16:08:24 2011 New Revision: 168542 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=168542 Log: gcc/fortran/: 2011-01-06 Daniel Franke franke.dan...@gmail.com PR fortran/33117 PR fortran/46478 * parse.c (parse_interface): Remove check for procedure types. * interface.c (check_interface0): Verify that procedures are either all SUBROUTINEs or all FUNCTIONs. gcc/testsuite/: 2011-01-06 Daniel Franke franke.dan...@gmail.com PR fortran/33117 PR fortran/46478 * gfortran.dg/interface_33.f90: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/interface_33.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/interface.c trunk/gcc/fortran/parse.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug fortran/46478] Missing diagnosis for combining SUBROUTINE and FUNCTION in a GENERIC interface
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46478 --- Comment #3 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-06 16:08:29 UTC --- Author: dfranke Date: Thu Jan 6 16:08:24 2011 New Revision: 168542 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=168542 Log: gcc/fortran/: 2011-01-06 Daniel Franke franke.dan...@gmail.com PR fortran/33117 PR fortran/46478 * parse.c (parse_interface): Remove check for procedure types. * interface.c (check_interface0): Verify that procedures are either all SUBROUTINEs or all FUNCTIONs. gcc/testsuite/: 2011-01-06 Daniel Franke franke.dan...@gmail.com PR fortran/33117 PR fortran/46478 * gfortran.dg/interface_33.f90: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/interface_33.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/interface.c trunk/gcc/fortran/parse.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug fortran/46478] Missing diagnosis for combining SUBROUTINE and FUNCTION in a GENERIC interface
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46478 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 --- Comment #4 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-06 16:11:05 UTC --- Fixed on trunk. Closing.
[Bug fortran/33117] Improve error message for generic interface with subroutines functions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33117 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0 --- Comment #3 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-06 16:10:56 UTC --- Fixed on trunk. Closing.
[Bug fortran/47195] [4.6 regression] New Fortran test failures
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47195 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2011.01.06 20:13:09 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1
[Bug fortran/47195] [4.6 regression] New Fortran test failures
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47195 --- Comment #3 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-06 21:42:56 UTC --- Author: dfranke Date: Thu Jan 6 21:42:53 2011 New Revision: 168554 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=168554 Log: 2011-01-06 Daniel Franke franke.dan...@gmail.com PR fortran/47195 * gfortran.dg/interface_33.f90: Fixed dg-error declarations. * gfortran.dg/defined_operators_1.f90: Split the subroutine from the interface of functions to not hide the errors that shall be tested. Modified: trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/defined_operators_1.f90 trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/interface_33.f90
[Bug fortran/47195] [4.6 regression] New Fortran test failures
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47195 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #4 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-06 21:44:28 UTC --- Committed the fixes as obvious. ML-notification to follow. Sorry for the breakage and thanks for noticing! Closing.
[Bug bootstrap/47196] New: --disable-libquadmath breaks bootstrap in libgfortran (quadmath_weak.h not found)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47196 Summary: --disable-libquadmath breaks bootstrap in libgfortran (quadmath_weak.h not found) Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: bootstrap AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: dfra...@gcc.gnu.org CC: bur...@gcc.gnu.org Host: i686-pc-linux-gnu Configuring as: $ ../configure --prefix=[...] --program-suffix=-svn --with-system-zlib --enable-bootstrap --enable-threads=posix --enable-shared --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran --disable-maintainer-mode --disable-nls --disable-libmudflap --disable-libquadmath Ends with: $ make bootstrap [...] In file included from /home/daniel/svn/gcc-svn/libgfortran/fmain.c:4:0: /home/daniel/svn/gcc-svn/libgfortran/libgfortran.h:52:29: fatal error: quadmath_weak.h: No such file or directory
[Bug fortran/47136] [OOP] possible name resolution problems between MODULE and INTERFACE?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47136 --- Comment #4 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 13:47:41 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) Some related non-OOP examples: [...] Are these examples actually valid or invalid? Can someone give the relevant quotes from the standard? Lahey's online source checker rejects both examples with similar messages. It doesn't know OOP to test, but one could think that my initial example is invalid after all?!
[Bug fortran/47136] New: [OOP] possible name resolution problems between MODULE and INTERFACE?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47136 Summary: [OOP] possible name resolution problems between MODULE and INTERFACE? Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: dfra...@gcc.gnu.org CC: ja...@gcc.gnu.org In the snippet below, I believe that ABSTRACT INTERFACE s of MODULE a and the MODULE s interfere with each other in an unholy way. If either is renamed, the error goes away. As I can not see why duplicate names like these should be invalid, I'd assume the code as-is to be valid?! MODULE a ABSTRACT INTERFACE SUBROUTINE s() END SUBROUTINE END INTERFACE TYPE, ABSTRACT :: t CONTAINS PROCEDURE(s), DEFERRED, NOPASS :: pp END TYPE END MODULE MODULE s USE a END MODULE $ gfortran-svn -c iface.f90 iface.f90:17.7: USE a 1 Error: 's' must be a module procedure or an external procedure with an explicit interface at (1) $ gfortran-svn -v gcc version 4.6.0 20101230 (experimental) (GCC) Same for $ gfortran-4.5 -v gcc version 4.5.3 20101230 (prerelease) (GCC)
[Bug fortran/28004] Warn if intent(out) dummy variable is used before being defined
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28004 --- Comment #11 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-29 14:52:48 UTC --- Also related: PR45619.
[Bug fortran/45619] intent(out) dummy arguements in specification statements
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45619 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-29 14:53:07 UTC --- See also: PR28004.
[Bug fortran/32454] Bounds-check misses overflow of lhs array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32454 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #4 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-29 15:22:44 UTC --- Same as the other. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 31059 ***
[Bug fortran/31059] Detect nonconforming assignment of allocatable arrays
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31059 --- Comment #5 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-29 15:22:44 UTC --- *** Bug 32454 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/34741] Bounds-check of array-pointer == [ constructor ]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34741 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-29 15:22:47 UTC --- Same as the other. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 31059 ***
[Bug fortran/31059] Detect nonconforming assignment of allocatable arrays
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31059 --- Comment #6 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-29 15:22:47 UTC --- *** Bug 34741 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/44232] function result with pointer to strided component of argument
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44232 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||WORKSFORME
[Bug fortran/43179] ICE invalid if accessing array member of non-array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43179 --- Comment #8 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-30 02:39:58 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) (In reply to comment #4) (In reply to comment #2) OK for trunk with the usual embellishments of ChangeLogs and testcase? Yes, if you have an example for EXPR_FUNCTION - otherwise I would claim that EXPR_VARIABLE is enough. Paul, any plans to wrap this up? :) Another one for Sunday, or thereabouts. Ping?
[Bug fortran/37744] ICE-on-invalid with ISO_C_BINDING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37744 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail|| --- Comment #14 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-30 03:07:14 UTC --- (In reply to comment #12) I might take a look someday. It seems a namespace is freed to soon. -fwhole-file works as it retains namespaces till the end. You may also want to have a look at PR41093.
[Bug fortran/45827] [4.6 Regression] [OOP] mio_component_ref(): Component not found
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 --- Comment #38 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 12:22:48 UTC --- Created attachment 22856 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22856 testcase, ICE with patch in comment #35 (In reply to comment #37) I managed to get an ICE with your version (sym == NULL) No, that's not possible. My version (i.e. comment #35) is inserted at a slightly different place than yours, where the existence of 'sym' is already established. Err, sure it is possible: + if (sym-attr.is_class) + sym = sym-components-ts.u.derived; After this, sym is not checked any more and the ICE occurs in the next line: if (sym-components != NULL p-u.pointer == NULL) ^^^ That's why I moved it up a few lines and double check that sym really is non-NULL.
[Bug fortran/45827] [4.6 Regression] [OOP] mio_component_ref(): Component not found
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 --- Comment #40 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 17:27:00 UTC --- (In reply to comment #39) Ok, I get it. Sorry about the misconception. Feel free to commit the patch in comment #36 (provided it regtests ok). Or should I take care of it? Please, you did the hard work - it's yours :) Regression tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu - there is one regression in realloc_on_assign_2.f03, but that does not seem to be related to this patch?!
[Bug fortran/44232] function result with pointer to strided component of argument
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44232 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2010.12.28 17:55:10 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #13 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 17:55:10 UTC --- Anything new here or can this report be closed?
[Bug fortran/44352] ICE in string_to_single_character
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44352 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #11 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 17:59:25 UTC --- Tobias, anything left to do here or can this report be closed?
[Bug fortran/45654] -fwhole-file doesn't warn about INTERFACE vs. definition mismatches
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45654 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Blocks||29670 Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 18:23:33 UTC --- Same as #27318. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 27318 ***
[Bug fortran/45086] For whole-file checking, also check whether an INTERFACE matches
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45086 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Blocks||29670 --- Comment #3 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 18:23:56 UTC --- Same as #27318.
[Bug fortran/27318] gfortran should warn if a interface does not match
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27318 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 18:23:33 UTC --- *** Bug 45654 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/27318] gfortran should warn if a interface does not match
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27318 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 18:26:20 UTC --- *** Bug 45086 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/33117] Improve error message for generic interface with subroutines functions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33117 --- Comment #1 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 18:27:08 UTC --- *** Bug 46478 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/45086] For whole-file checking, also check whether an INTERFACE matches
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45086 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #4 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 18:26:20 UTC --- Bugger, should have been closed as dupe, 2nd try. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 27318 ***
[Bug fortran/46478] Missing diagnosis for combining SUBROUTINE and FUNCTION in a GENERIC interface
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46478 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 18:27:08 UTC --- Same as #33117. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 33117 ***
[Bug fortran/20896] ambiguous interface not detected
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20896 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|NEW --- Comment #15 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 21:41:57 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) I think this effectively a duplicate of PR 34004. Another possible dupe: PR39290.
[Bug fortran/39427] F2003: Procedures with same name as types/type constructors
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39427 --- Comment #24 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 21:49:39 UTC --- *** Bug 40824 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/40824] F2003: GENERIC interface with generic name = derived-type name
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40824 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 21:49:39 UTC --- Same as the other. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 39427 ***
[Bug fortran/45128] Segmentation fault with -fwhole-file for subref_array_pointer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45128 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 22:30:14 UTC --- Isn't this the same as PR34640?
[Bug fortran/34640] ICE when assigning item of a derived-component to a pointer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34640 --- Comment #19 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 22:30:10 UTC --- Other potential dupes: PR40737, PR45128.
[Bug fortran/40737] Pointer references sometimes fail to define span symbols
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40737 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Known to fail|| --- Comment #12 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 22:30:16 UTC --- Isn't this the same as PR34640?
[Bug fortran/40899] Leakage with derived types with ALLOCATABLE components
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40899 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #3 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 22:42:19 UTC --- The quoted clf post does not provide a complete testcase. Closing as INVALID. Please reopen if you feel that this PR should stay alive.
[Bug fortran/40850] double free in nested types with allocatable components
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40850 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to fail|| --- Comment #10 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 22:55:55 UTC --- This looks like a dupe of the nested constructor case of #38319?!
[Bug fortran/45318] Do more parenthesis simplification with -fno-protect-parens
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45318 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2010.12.28 23:37:54 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #3 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-28 23:37:54 UTC --- Given Richard's comments and no testcase, I'm in doubt if this PR is meaningful?!
[Bug fortran/46478] Missing diagnosis for combining SUBROUTINE and FUNCTION in a GENERIC interface
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46478 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW Last reconfirmed||2010.12.29 00:44:29 Resolution|DUPLICATE | Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-29 00:44:29 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 33117 *** Too quick - very close, but not a dupe. Reopening.
[Bug fortran/46017] Reject ALLOCATE(a, a%b) as a%b depends on the allocation status of a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46017 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2010.12.29 02:57:44 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-29 02:57:44 UTC --- Small testcase with additional twist: double allocation of 'tt' is not reported either: TYPE :: t INTEGER, ALLOCATABLE :: a(:) END TYPE TYPE(t), ALLOCATABLE :: tt ALLOCATE (tt, tt, tt%a(3)) END
[Bug fortran/34805] Better error message for: defined assignment not allowed to vector subscripted array
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34805 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #8 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-29 03:06:28 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) Let's mark it as diagnostic. I think the error message could be improved and probably the typo patch of comment #2 still needs to be applied. Patch in comment #2 has been applied at some point. Closing as INVALID as requested by the reporter.
[Bug fortran/45827] [4.6 Regression] mio_component_ref(): Component not found
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 --- Comment #34 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 14:27:36 UTC --- With both testcases, tracing the search in module.c(mio_component_ref), I get: mio_component_ref: looking for 'n', current: '_data' mio_component_ref: looking for 'n', current: '_vptr' polytest.f90:36.28: USE abstract_weight_policy 1 Internal Error at (1): mio_component_ref(): Component not found Does this help?
[Bug fortran/47069] New: [OOP] undefined reference for virtual hook
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47069 Summary: [OOP] undefined reference for virtual hook Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org ReportedBy: dfra...@gcc.gnu.org CC: ja...@gcc.gnu.org The code below fails to compile due to an undefined reference to the virtual hook. I have no idea if this is valid Fortran of any standard, but if it isn't, I'd expect a warning or an error, if it is, I'd like to have an executable program :) I currently do not have any 4.5 around, so only tested with trunk. $ gfortran-svn hook.f90 /tmp/ccZb2JsG.o: In function `__abstract_weight_policy_MOD_init': hook.f90:(.text+0x26): undefined reference to `init_hook_' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status $ $ gfortran-svn -v gcc version 4.6.0 20101226 (experimental) (GCC) $ cat hook.f90 MODULE abstract_weight_policy TYPE, ABSTRACT :: abstract_weight PRIVATE INTEGER :: n, a CONTAINS PROCEDURE :: init PROCEDURE(hook), PRIVATE, DEFERRED :: init_hook END TYPE ABSTRACT INTERFACE FUNCTION hook(this, n) IMPORT :: abstract_weight CLASS(abstract_weight), INTENT(inout) :: this INTEGER :: n, hook END FUNCTION END INTERFACE CONTAINS SUBROUTINE init(this, n) CLASS(abstract_weight), INTENT(inout) :: this INTEGER, INTENT(in) :: n this%n = n this%a = init_hook(this, n) END SUBROUTINE END MODULE MODULE myweights_policy USE abstract_weight_policy TYPE, EXTENDS(abstract_weight) :: myweights CONTAINS PROCEDURE :: init_hook = myweights_init END TYPE CONTAINS FUNCTION myweights_init(this, n) CLASS(myweights), INTENT(inout) :: this INTEGER :: n, myweights_init, k myweights_init = SUM((/ (k, k=1, n) /)) END FUNCTION END MODULE PROGRAM test USE myweights_policy TYPE(myweights) :: w CALL w%init(10) END PROGRAM
[Bug fortran/47069] [OOP] undefined reference for virtual hook
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47069 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 18:27:44 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) Therefore you get a linker error, and you deserve it ;) What you probably want to do is this%a = this%init_hook(n) Oh my bloody stupidness! Of course! A C++-ism that crept in - and I looked at it for ... hours ... *blush* Closing as invalid. Thanks for the pointer and I apologize for the noise.
[Bug fortran/45827] [4.6 Regression] [OOP] mio_component_ref(): Component not found
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827
--- Comment #36 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27
22:18:27 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #35)
Yes, I think I know what's going on. One way to fix it is the following:
I managed to get an ICE with your version (sym == NULL), this seems to work
(not regtested):
Index: module.c
===
--- module.c(revision 168256)
+++ module.c(working copy)
@@ -2311,6 +2311,9 @@
{
mio_internal_string (name);
+ if (sym sym-attr.is_class)
+sym = sym-components-ts.u.derived;
+
/* It can happen that a component reference can be read before the
associated derived type symbol has been loaded. Return now and
wait for a later iteration of load_needed. */
[Bug fortran/35612] testsuite ISO_C_BIND code error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35612 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||WORKSFORME --- Comment #7 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 23:28:16 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) Setting status to WAITING. To be closed as WORKSFORME(?) in 3 months form now if no further information comes forward. Closing.
[Bug fortran/40581] Missed optimization in scalar operators on arrays
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40581 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #3 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 23:30:51 UTC --- Still unclear what this is about. Closing. Tobias, please reopen if you want to keep this.
[Bug fortran/47030] !GCC$ Attributes do not work for COMMON variables in procedures and BLOCK DATA
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47030 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 23:34:45 UTC --- Is this related to/dupe of PR42568?
[Bug fortran/46416] libquadmath: missing functions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46416 --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 23:54:38 UTC --- *** Bug 46402 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/46416] libquadmath: missing functions
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46416 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Summary|libquadmath: Complex|libquadmath: missing |inverse |functions |hyperbolic/trigonometric| |function missing: casinhq | |etc.| --- Comment #1 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 23:54:32 UTC --- Merging in PR46402, fmalq missing in libquadmath. Comment #0: [2010-10-27 21:45:00] jakub_ fx_: btw, you want to resync with glibc to get quad mode fmal (well, fmaq in your case) Cf. http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.gita=searchh=HEADst=commits=fmal
[Bug fortran/46402] libquadmath: Add fmalq
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46402 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 23:54:38 UTC --- Added fmalq to list of missing functions in PR46416. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 46416 ***
[Bug fortran/18584] --std=f would be nice
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18584 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||thenlich at users dot ||sourceforge.net --- Comment #9 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-26 23:55:46 UTC --- *** Bug 47039 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/47039] Support warnings/errors for non-F features.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47039 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-26 23:55:46 UTC --- The last request for F was closed as WONTFIX well over two years ago (after sitting there for 4 years without anyone bothering) ... *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 18584 ***
[Bug fortran/46979] Possible false may be used uninitialized in this function warning
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46979 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Known to work||4.6.0 Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 00:02:21 UTC --- Closing.
[Bug fortran/46917] ICE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46917 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||INVALID --- Comment #5 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 00:05:53 UTC --- Closing as INVALID due to comments #1 to #4. Please reopen if you feel that this PR should live on.
[Bug fortran/46917] ICE
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46917 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||michael.a.richmond at nasa ||dot gov --- Comment #6 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 00:09:46 UTC --- *** Bug 46825 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/46825] ICE compiling modules with MinGW build dated 20101204
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46825 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #3 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 00:09:46 UTC --- Closing. Please see comments #1 to #4 in PR46917 for further details. Please reopen if you feel that this PR should live on. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 46917 ***
[Bug fortran/46874] [OpenMP] ICE in gfc_conv_descriptor_data_get, at fortran/trans-array.c:147
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46874 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2010.12.27 00:15:55 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #8 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 00:15:55 UTC --- Jakub, is there anything left here or can this report be closed?
[Bug fortran/46703] Wrong I/O output (only) when running under valgrind
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46703 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2010.12.27 00:23:27 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 00:23:27 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) Maybe yet another of x86's extra floating point precision effects. I suppose where valgrind needs to do its verifications, it interrupts the program and saves/restores the registers (to memory), thus losing the extra precision. Seconded. Simple test: does -ffloat-store change the output as well?
[Bug fortran/46405] Preprocessor generated code can exceed 132 characters
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46405 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING
[Bug fortran/46411] MOVE_ALLOC wrongly rejected as impure
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46411 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2010.12.27 00:30:19 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #4 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 00:30:19 UTC --- Tobias, is there anything left or can this report be closed?
[Bug fortran/46520] [4.6 Regression] libquadmath: fails at link test on bare irons
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46520 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed||2010.12.27 00:33:08 CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Ever Confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #8 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 00:33:08 UTC --- Tobias, anything left here or can this report be closed?
[Bug fortran/45909] [4.4/4.5] internal compiler error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45909 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |WAITING CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Summary|f951.exe: internal compiler |[4.4/4.5] internal compiler |error: Segmentation fault |error --- Comment #2 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 00:50:35 UTC --- Set to WAITING. If nobody picks this up in a while, this PR shall be closed.
[Bug testsuite/45988] gfortran.dg/vect/fast-math-pr38968.f90 times out on 32-bit Solaris 10/x86
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45988 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org Component|fortran |testsuite --- Comment #1 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 00:52:44 UTC --- Doesn't seem to be overly fortran related?! Reassigning to component 'testsuite', assuming that it's more likely that someone may pick it up.
[Bug fortran/45676] Move array assignments out of loop
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45676 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 01:22:56 UTC --- Ha! I knew I have seen this before. Dupe of #30409?
[Bug fortran/40876] OpenMP private variable referenced in a statement function
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40876 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug fortran/37336] Fortran 2003: Finish derived-type finalization
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37336 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 02:04:07 UTC --- I had the vague impression that FINAL was already completed, so I gave it a try ... polytest.f90:28.22: SUBROUTINE free(this) 1 Error: Argument of FINAL procedure at (1) must be of type 'abstract_weight' for SUBROUTINE free(this) CLASS(abstract_weight), INTENT(inout) :: this ! ... END SUBROUTINE Placing the error marker at CLASS() and rewording to must be of 'TYPE(abstract_weight)' might ease some confusion. It took me a while to figure out what's wrong ^^ However, any plans to get this completed in the foreseeable future?
[Bug fortran/45827] mio_component_ref(): Component not found when mixing f90 and f03 in large projects
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #32 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-27 02:22:45 UTC --- Same error for this testcase: MODULE abstract_weight_policy TYPE, ABSTRACT :: abstract_weight PRIVATE INTEGER :: n REAL(8), ALLOCATABLE :: w(:) CONTAINS PROCEDURE(create), DEFERRED :: create PROCEDURE :: get PROCEDURE :: destroy END TYPE ABSTRACT INTERFACE SUBROUTINE create(this, n, s, I) IMPORT abstract_weight CLASS(abstract_weight), INTENT(inout) :: this INTEGER, INTENT(in) :: n REAL(8), INTENT(in) :: s(n), I(n) END SUBROUTINE END INTERFACE CONTAINS PURE FUNCTION get(this) CLASS(abstract_weight), INTENT(in) :: this REAL(8), DIMENSION(this%n) :: get get = this%w END FUNCTION SUBROUTINE destroy(this) CLASS(abstract_weight), INTENT(inout) :: this IF (ALLOCATED(this%w)) DEALLOCATE(this%w) this%n = 0 END SUBROUTINE END MODULE MODULE myweights_policy USE abstract_weight_policy END MODULE $ gfortran-svn -Wall -W polytest.f90 polytest.f90:36.28: USE abstract_weight_policy 1 Internal Error at (1): mio_component_ref(): Component not found $ gfortran-svn -v gcc version 4.6.0 20101226 (experimental) (GCC) The error is consistent and reproducible for me, nothing fishy from valgrind. Although the error is identical, no idea if the reason to trigger it is the same as the reporter's.
[Bug fortran/46405] Preprocessor generated code can exceed 132 characters
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46405 Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-16 00:14:01 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) (In reply to comment #3) I was thinking this same solution. But, maybe the user who is having the problem should just do that. I think that's the cleanest solution. After all, even if the line length is only exceeded due to the CPP macro, it is still invaid Fortran. Same here. Close as INVALID/WONTFIX?
[Bug fortran/45786] Relational operators .eq. and == are not recognized as equivalent
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45786
Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 from Daniel Franke dfranke at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-12-16
00:25:54 UTC ---
Shot in the dark, isn't this related to ...
typedef enum
{ [...]
/* ==, /=, , =, , = */
INTRINSIC_EQ, INTRINSIC_NE, INTRINSIC_GT, INTRINSIC_GE,
INTRINSIC_LT, INTRINSIC_LE,
/* .EQ., .NE., .GT., .GE., .LT., .LE. (OS = Old-Style) */
INTRINSIC_EQ_OS, INTRINSIC_NE_OS, INTRINSIC_GT_OS, INTRINSIC_GE_OS,
INTRINSIC_LT_OS, INTRINSIC_LE_OS,
[...]
}
gfc_intrinsic_op;
... which was introduced to ...
(In reply to comment #5)
IIRC, it used to be that way but it was changed to emit better diagnostics.
Hence
(In reply to comment #1)
interface operator(.eq.)
module procedure eq_foo
end interface operator(==)
would be begun with INTRINSIC_EQ_OS as operator and closed with INTRINSIC_EQ?!
If the one style is silently converted to another style during parsing, the
above could be undone?
