Hi, On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 15:06:02 +0200 Mikael Morin <mikael.mo...@sfr.fr> wrote:
> Le 17/08/2014 14:26, Dominique Dhumieres a écrit : > > As Mikael said in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2014-08/msg00047.html > > > >> the testcase should check that the code generated is actually working, > >> not just that the ICE disappeared. ... > > > Well, this is for another patch where deferred character variable are > made acceptable as argument to unlimited polymorphic dummies. > Here the ICE comes (if I remember correctly) from the wrong generic > procedure being picked, so there is not really some new feature enabled > with the patch. This is correct so far. > > > thus I think the test should be run, i.e., '! { dg-do compile }' should > > be replaced with '! { dg-do run }' (I have checked that the test succeeds). > > > I don't have a strong opinion for it, but I'm OK with that change. > In fact the initial test was a run one, and it has been changed to > compile. Andre: why? I was asked to move to compile only, because a run test takes a lot of time. I was told that the run test compiles the code multiple times with different optimization. This issue was deemed to be solely on the compile stage and was not influenced by optimization. Therefore I agreed to switch to dg-do compile. That the test is fine for running, too, is merely for my training of how to do that. My opinion is, that dg-do compile is sufficient to prove, that PR60414 is resolved, because that is the sole purpose of the patch. I understand Dominique wanting to have the dg-do run, because the effectiveness of the patch is only shown on running the test. Is there a compromise of running a test, but only for one optimization stage? Then may be we can do that. - Andre -- Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de
