Hi Harald,
let's add a LGTM or OK to this – the patch is rather obvious and Steve
explained how the now-removed check ended up in gfortran.
Thanks for the patch!
Tobias
On 12/11/19 11:24 PM, Harald Anlauf wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. Dezember 2019 um 23:34 Uhr
Von: "Thomas Koenig" <tkoe...@netcologne.de>
An: "Harald Anlauf" <anl...@gmx.de>, gfortran <fort...@gcc.gnu.org>, gcc-patches
<gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Betreff: Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR92898 - [9/10 Regression] ICE in
gfc_check_is_contiguous, at fortran/check.c:7157
Hello Harald,
Index: gcc/fortran/check.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/fortran/check.c (Revision 279183)
+++ gcc/fortran/check.c (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -7154,7 +7154,9 @@ bool
gfc_check_is_contiguous (gfc_expr *array)
{
if (array->expr_type == EXPR_NULL
- && array->symtree->n.sym->attr.pointer == 1)
+ && (!array->symtree ||
+ (array->symtree->n.sym &&
+ array->symtree->n.sym->attr.pointer == 1)))
I have to admit I do not understand the original code here, nor
do I quite understand your fix.
Is there any circumstance where array->expr_type == EXPR_NULL, but
is_contiguous is valid? What would go wrong if the other tests
were removed?
Actually I do not know what the additional check was supposed to do.
Removing it does not seem to do any harm. See below.
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr91641.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr91641.f90 (Revision 279183)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr91641.f90 (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -1,7 +1,9 @@
! { dg-do compile }
! PR fortran/91641
-! Code conyributed by Gerhard Steinmetz
+! PR fortran/92898
+! Code contributed by Gerhard Steinmetz
program p
real, pointer :: z(:)
print *, is_contiguous (null(z)) ! { dg-error "shall be an associated"
}
+ print *, is_contiguous (null()) ! { dg-error "shall be an associated" }
end
Sometimes, it is necessary to change test cases, when error messages
change. If this is not the case, it is better to add new tests to
new test cases - this makes regression hunting much easier.
Regards
Thomas
Agreed. Please find the modified patches below. OK for trunk / 9 ?
Thanks,
Harald
Index: gcc/fortran/check.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/fortran/check.c (Revision 279254)
+++ gcc/fortran/check.c (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -7153,8 +7153,7 @@ gfc_check_ttynam_sub (gfc_expr *unit, gfc_expr *na
bool
gfc_check_is_contiguous (gfc_expr *array)
{
- if (array->expr_type == EXPR_NULL
- && array->symtree->n.sym->attr.pointer == 1)
+ if (array->expr_type == EXPR_NULL)
{
gfc_error ("Actual argument at %L of %qs intrinsic shall be an "
"associated pointer", &array->where, gfc_current_intrinsic);
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr92898.f90
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr92898.f90 (nicht existent)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr92898.f90 (Arbeitskopie)
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! PR fortran/92898
+! Code contributed by Gerhard Steinmetz
+program p
+ print *, is_contiguous (null()) ! { dg-error "shall be an associated" }
+end
2019-12-11 Harald Anlauf <anl...@gmx.de>
PR fortran/92898
* check.c (gfc_check_is_contiguous): Simplify check to handle
arbitrary NULL() argument.
2019-12-11 Harald Anlauf <anl...@gmx.de>
PR fortran/92898
* gfortran.dg/pr92898.f90: New test.
