------- Comment #10 from jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-05-04 07:39
-------
Comment #9 is a red herring. Using gdb and looking at this at line 2143:
mpz_set (result->value.integer, e->ts.cl->length->value.integer);
(gdb) p *e->ts.cl->length
$9 = {expr_type = EXPR_CONSTANT, ts = {type = BT_REAL, kind = 4,
derived = 0x0, cl = 0x0}, rank = 0, shape = 0x0, symtree = 0x0, ref = 0x0,
where = {nextc = 0xef3b0c "2.3) :: s", lb = 0xef3ae0}, from_H = 0,
inline_noncopying_intrinsic = 0, con_by_offset = 0x0, value = {logical = 24,
integer = {{_mp_alloc = 24, _mp_size = 0, _mp_d = 0x1}}, real = {{
_mpfr_prec = 24, _mpfr_sign = 1, _mpfr_exp = 2, _mpfr_d = 0xf25d08}},
complex = {r = {{_mpfr_prec = 24, _mpfr_sign = 1, _mpfr_exp = 2,
_mpfr_d = 0xf25d08}}, i = {{_mpfr_prec = 0, _mpfr_sign = 0,
_mpfr_exp = 0, _mpfr_d = 0x0}}}, op = {operator = 24, uop = 0x1,
op1 = 0x2, op2 = 0xf25d08}, function = {actual = 0x18,
name = 0x1 <Address 0x1 out of bounds>, isym = 0x2, esym = 0xf25d08},
character = {length = 24, string = 0x1 <Address 0x1 out of bounds>},
constructor = 0x18}}
The type is real and we are trying to use the value.integer which is probably
meaningless. Again, I am unable to really test this, but here is a suggestion:
Index: simplify.c
===================================================================
--- simplify.c (revision 124405)
+++ simplify.c (working copy)
@@ -2136,14 +2136,15 @@ gfc_simplify_len (gfc_expr *e)
}
if (e->ts.cl != NULL && e->ts.cl->length != NULL
- && e->ts.cl->length->expr_type == EXPR_CONSTANT)
+ && e->ts.cl->length->expr_type == EXPR_CONSTANT
+ && e->ts.cl->length->ts.type == BT_INTEGER)
{
result = gfc_constant_result (BT_INTEGER, gfc_default_integer_kind,
&e->where);
mpz_set (result->value.integer, e->ts.cl->length->value.integer);
return range_check (result, "LEN");
}
-
+
return NULL;
}
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31251
