Hi Andre, I don't think that's possible but I am prepared to be proven wrong :-) Do you have an example in mind, where this might happen?
Regards Paul On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 at 10:52, Andre Vehreschild <ve...@gmx.de> wrote: > Hi Paul, > > in principle the patch looks sound, but is the vptr_size always the same > as a > descriptor->span? Can't the later be larger because of padding? If that is > the > case, then the first `else if (UNLIMITED...` you removed in > `gfc_get_array_span > ()` would return a larger number. > > Regards, > Andre > > On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:10:07 +0000 > Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > This was yet another regression that I caused, which was backported and > so > > I am rather anxious to fix it promptly. > > > > The modifications that I made to gfc_get_array_span caused > > unlimited polymorphic array components to be missed, when contained in a > > dummy. Instead, the dummy was taken to be the class container, which then > > caused the segfault > > > > I took the opportunity to refactor gfc_get_array_span such that it is now > > improved over its original form. Class data descriptors now cannot be > > missed for any declared type. The new helper function > > 'class_array_element_size' extracts the vptr from both the class object > and > > from class dummies. The vptr size is then returned, except in the case of > > unlimited polymorphic expressions, where the vptr size must be corrected > > with the _len value. The class container is unambiguously obtainable from > > the vptr. > > > > Regression tests - OK for mainline and then, after a short while, > > backported to the affected branches? > > > > Paul > > > -- > Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de >
