[Bug fortran/106100] New: where

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106100 Bug ID: 106100 Summary: where Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at

[Bug fortran/103914] -fcheck=do seems not to work with omp parallel do construct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103914 --- Comment #3 from xiao@compiler-dev.com --- (In reply to xiao@compiler-dev.com from comment #2) > Thanks a lot. (In reply to anlauf from comment #1) > (In reply to xiao@compiler-dev.com from comment #0) > > I have some questions:

[Bug fortran/103914] -fcheck=do seems not to work with omp parallel do construct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103914 --- Comment #2 from xiao@compiler-dev.com --- Thanks a lot.

[Bug fortran/103914] New: -fcheck=do: Problems with omp parallel do construct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103914 Bug ID: 103914 Summary: -fcheck=do: Problems with omp parallel do construct Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/103342] New: [OPENMP]Missing barrier for linear clause within loop simd construct which not directly contained by parrellel construct

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103342 Bug ID: 103342 Summary: [OPENMP]Missing barrier for linear clause within loop simd construct which not directly contained by parrellel construct Product: gcc

[Bug fortran/101079] [OPENMP] The value of list-item in linear clause in loop construct is not calculated on each iteration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101079 --- Comment #6 from xiao@compiler-dev.com --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5) > OpenMP language committee discussions aren't public, there will be soon an > OpenMP 5.2 public draft though. > The particular restriction under

[Bug fortran/101079] [OPENMP] The value of list-item in linear clause in loop construct is not calculated on each iteration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101079 --- Comment #4 from xiao@compiler-dev.com --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > Under discussions in OpenMP language committee, but the latest proposal is > that this is invalid, you need to increment the linear variable by >

[Bug fortran/101079] [OPENMP] The value of list-item in linear clause in loop construct is not calculated on each iteration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101079 --- Comment #3 from xiao@compiler-dev.com --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > Under discussions in OpenMP language committee, but the latest proposal is > that this is invalid, you need to increment the linear variable by >

[Bug fortran/101079] [OPENMP] The value of list-item in linear clause in loop construct is not calculated on each iteration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101079 --- Comment #2 from xiao@compiler-dev.com --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > Under discussions in OpenMP language committee, but the latest proposal is > that this is invalid, you need to increment the linear variable by >

[Bug fortran/101079] New: [OPENMP] The value of list-item in linear clause in loop construct is not calculated on each iteration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101079 Bug ID: 101079 Summary: [OPENMP] The value of list-item in linear clause in loop construct is not calculated on each iteration Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status:

[Bug fortran/100555] [OPENMP] ICE in target parallel construct with if-clause

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100555 --- Comment #1 from xiao@compiler-dev.com --- Additionally, "implicit none" will lead errors if exists directive-name-modifier in if-clause. module m integer, save :: n = 4 end module program test use m use omp_lib implicit none

[Bug fortran/100555] New: [OPENMP] ICE in target parallel construct with if-clause

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100555 Bug ID: 100555 Summary: [OPENMP] ICE in target parallel construct with if-clause Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/100110] New: Parameterized Derived Types, problems with global variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100110 Bug ID: 100110 Summary: Parameterized Derived Types, problems with global variable Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/99709] New: VALUE attribute for an object with nonconstant length parameter

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99709 Bug ID: 99709 Summary: VALUE attribute for an object with nonconstant length parameter Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/98948] New: unexpected error in procedure pointer initialization or assignment with intrinsic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98948 Bug ID: 98948 Summary: unexpected error in procedure pointer initialization or assignment with intrinsic Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED

[Bug fortran/98458] PRINT the array constructed from implied do-loop throw ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98458 --- Comment #5 from xiao@compiler-dev.com --- (In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #4) > Created attachment 49856 [details] > Fix for the PR > > Thank you for the report on this problem. > > The attached patch fixes the problem and

[Bug fortran/98458] New: implied do-loop used in initialization with RESHAPE throw ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98458 Bug ID: 98458 Summary: implied do-loop used in initialization with RESHAPE throw ICE Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal

[Bug fortran/98307] New: use "allocatable" instead of "pointer" (forall_3.f90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98307 Bug ID: 98307 Summary: use "allocatable" instead of "pointer" (forall_3.f90) Product: gcc Version: 10.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3