Dear Paul,
Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
Thanks for the patch
Thanks also from my side.
PS Why, in principle, can data objects not have co-indices?
I think there is no really fundamental reason, but it doesn't make
really sense. DATA is an explicit initialization, similar to
"integer :: i = 5"
and (mostly) has implicitly the SAVE attribute. [5.6.7 @ J3/16-007r1] To
initialize the variable on a remote image feels odd - especially as each
image initializes it to the same value.
[Side remark, since I just stumbled over it: "The statement ordering
rules allow DATA statements to appear anywhere in a program unit after
the specification statements. The ability to position DATA statements
amongst executable statements is very rarely used, unnecessary, and a
potential source of error." (B.3.5 in the section of obsolescent
features in F2015 (J3/16-007r1).)]
Cheers,
Tobias
On 21 June 2016 at 16:15, Tobias Burnus
<tobias.bur...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
Dear all,
the problem comes up with:
data a(1)[1] /1/
which is invalid. In resolve.c's check_data_variable(), one has:
if (!gfc_resolve_expr (var->expr))
return false;
...
e = var->expr;
if (e->expr_type != EXPR_VARIABLE)
gfc_internal_error ("check_data_variable(): Bad expression");
which triggers as resolve_variable() has:
if (t && flag_coarray == GFC_FCOARRAY_LIB && gfc_is_coindexed (e))
add_caf_get_intrinsic (e);
The solution is either not to decorate the DATA variable with
caf_get() - or to strip it off for testing. The latter has been
done in this patch. It's not really beautify, but works.
Additionally, I had to add the argument-handling short cut
as otherwise, more and more caf_get() could be added around the
argument, which is both pointless and causes the strip off to
fail.
Build and regtested on x86-64-gnu-linux.
OK for the trunk? Or do you see a more beautiful approach?
Tobias
