Hi Andre, > thanks for the input on the missing testcase, Janus (btw, when you know where > to > get a new crystal ball, let me know; I am missing mine, too). The new version > of the patch adds a new testcase coarray_41.f90 to test that the compiler > compiles correctly and the test runs ok. > > Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-linux/f23. Ok for trunk?
yes, good for trunk then. Cheers, Janus > On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 12:11:50 +0100 > Janus Weil <ja...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > >> Hi Andre, >> >> > all the sanitizer issues I fixed occur during compiling the testsuite. So I >> > would say, that when with the patch these errors do not occur anymore while >> > processing the testsuite, then those are tested for, right? >> >> aah, so you're saying that hunk is not actually related to the PR in >> the subject line, but instead fixes a testsuite failure seen with a >> sanitized compiler? That wasn't mentioned anywhere and sadly I forgot >> to bring my crystal ball ... >> >> Cheers, >> Janus >> >> >> >> > On Mon, 12 Dec 2016 13:37:43 +0100 >> > Janus Weil <ja...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >> > >> >> Hi Andre, >> >> >> >> > the attached patch corrects reporting of "Sorry, unimplemented yet" for >> >> > allocatable and pointer components in polymorphic objects (BT_CLASS) >> >> > thus >> >> > fixing two ICEs reported in the PR. >> >> > >> >> > The next chunk fixes an ICE when the declaration containing the token >> >> > information is of type POINTER or REFERENCE. >> >> > >> >> > Bootstraps and regtests ok on x86_64-linux/f23. Ok for trunk? >> >> >> >> the resolve.c hunk is certainly ok. The trans-array.c part looks >> >> reasonable as well, but I wonder if it is actually covered by any of >> >> your test cases? Since they are all compile-only, with errors being >> >> thrown at resolution stage, do they even get to the translation stage? >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> Janus >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de > > > -- > Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de
