Le 23/05/2024 à 09:49, Mikael Morin a écrit :
Le 13/05/2024 à 09:25, Mikael Morin a écrit :
Le 10/05/2024 à 21:56, Harald Anlauf a écrit :
Am 10.05.24 um 21:48 schrieb Harald Anlauf:
Hi Mikael,
Am 10.05.24 um 11:45 schrieb Mikael Morin:
Le 09/05/2024 à 22:30, Harald Anlauf a écrit :
I'll stop here...
Thanks. Go figure, I have no problem reproducing today.
It's PR99798 (and there is even a patch for it).
this patch has rotten a bit: the type of gfc_reluease_symbol
has changed to bool, this can be fixed.
Unfortunately, applying the patch does not remove the ICEs here...
Oops, I take that back! There was an error on my side applying the
patch; and now it does fix the ICEs after correcting that hickup....
Now the PR99798 patch is ready to be pushed, but I won't be available
for a few days. We can finish our discussion on this topic afterwards.
Hello,
I'm coming back to this.
I think either one of Steve's patch or your variant in the PR is a
better fix for the ICE as a first step; they seem less fragile at least.
Then we can look at a possible reordering of conflict checks as with the
patch you originally submitted in this thread.
Replying to myself...
It's not a great plan if we want to avoid unnecessary churn in the
testsuite.
