[Bug fortran/100094] Undefined pointers have incorrect rank when using optimization

2023-06-01 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100094

Paul Thomas  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |WAITING
 Blocks|87477   |

--- Comment #4 from Paul Thomas  ---
Hi Jose,

This seems to me to have fixed itself.

I'll put the PR to "waiting" until you confirm (or not!).

I have also stopped it from blocking the associate meta-bug 87477.

Thanks

Paul


Referenced Bugs:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87477
[Bug 87477] [meta-bug] [F03] issues concerning the ASSOCIATE statement

[Bug fortran/100094] Undefined pointers have incorrect rank when using optimization

2021-04-16 Thread jrfsousa at gmail dot com via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100094

--- Comment #3 from José Rui Faustino de Sousa  ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> Isn't the code invalid Fortran because it references an undefined pointer?
> If yes, the compiler is allows to do whatever it wants with the code.

AFAIK that is correct off all the "associate-like" constructs, the only
exception is select rank.

11.1.10.3 Attributes of a SELECT RANK associate name, paragraph 3:

"The associating entity has the ALLOCATABLE, POINTER, or TARGET attribute if
the selector has that attribute. The other attributes of the associating entity
are described in 11.1.3.3."

Best regards,
José Rui

[Bug fortran/100094] Undefined pointers have incorrect rank when using optimization

2021-04-16 Thread dominiq at lps dot ens.fr via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100094

Dominique d'Humieres  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Last reconfirmed||2021-04-16
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW

--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres  ---
Confirmed.

[Bug fortran/100094] Undefined pointers have incorrect rank when using optimization

2021-04-15 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100094

kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Isn't the code invalid Fortran because it references an undefined pointer?
If yes, the compiler is allows to do whatever it wants with the code.