Jerry D <jvdelis...@gmail.com> writes: > On 11/25/24 3:09 AM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: >> Hi All, >> The breakage was caused by the patch for PR109345. As it happens, >> this part of the patch was not required to fix the PR and looked to >> be a considerable simplification of the condition. Although correct >> that all is left are class dummies, it caused the regression by not >> checking that it is a class array reference. >> Regtested on mainline. OK to apply to all affected branches after >> regtesting the backports? >> Regards >> Paul >> Fortran: Partial reversion of patch for pr109345 [PR117763] >> 2024-11-25 Paul Thomas <pa...@gcc.gnu.org >> <mailto:pa...@gcc.gnu.org>> >> gcc/fortran >> PR fortran/117763 >> * trans-array.cc (gfc_get_array_span): Guard against derefences >> of 'expr'. Clean up some typos. Use 'gfc_get_vptr_from_expr' >> for clarity and apply a functional reversion of last section >> that deals with class dummies. >> gcc/testsuite/ >> PR fortran/117763 >> * gfortran.dg/pr117763.f90: New test. >>
(Any reason this can't be a dg-do run test?) > > OK Paul, thanks for quick fix. > > Jerry
