Dear Paul, The problem for oo.f90 is pr 55901.
I am updating my working tree with Andre’s patch. Cheers, Dominique > Le 8 déc. 2014 à 21:20, Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.tho...@gmail.com> a > écrit : > > Dear Andre, > > s/furure/future/ :-) > > Why are you using a double underscore in get__len_component? > > More seriously, I think that the len field should be added unconditionally to > unlimited polymorphic variables. Otherwise, you might find unlimited > polymorphic variables that are created in an already compiled > module/subprogramme arriving without the requisite field. > > Michael Metcalf has posted an example that makes use of unlimited > polymorphism at ftp://ftp.numerical.rl.ac.uk/pub/MRandC/oo.f90 . gfortran > does not work correctly with it at the moment because of the lack of a len > field. Removing all the string input allows it to run correctly. I think that > you should ensure that your patch fixes the problem. > > A slight obstacle is that the substring at line 216 causes the emission of: > type is (character(*)) > 1 > Error: Associate-name '__tmp_CHARACTER_0_1' at (1) is used as array > > Just retaining print *, 'character = "', v, '"' allows the example to compile > > ifort compiles and runs it successfully and so I think that it would be nice > if gfortran catches up on this one. > > Parenthetically, I wonder if this is not the time to implement PR53971... > including responding to Mikael's comment? > > Anyway, this is a good start in the right direction. Please persist! > > Thanks > > Paul > > > On 8 December 2014 at 18:38, Andre Vehreschild <ve...@gmx.de> wrote: > Hi all, > > please find attached a more elaborate patch for pr60255. I totally agree that > my first attempt was just scratching the surface of the work needed. > > This patch also is *not* complete, but because I am really new to gfortran > patching, I don't want to present a final patch only to learn then, that I > have > violated design rules, common practice or the like. Therefore please comment > and direct me to any sources/ideas to improve the patch. > > Topic: > The pr 60255 is about assigning a char array to an unlimited polymorphic > entity. In the comments the concern about the lost length information is > raised. The patch adds a _len component to the unlimited polymorphic entity > (after _data and _vtab) and adds an assignment of the string length to _len > when a string is pointer assigned to the unlimited poly entity. Furthermore is > the intrinsic len(unlimited poly pointing to a string) resolved to give the > _len component. > > Yet missing: > - assign _len component back to deferred char array length component > - transport length along chains of unlimited poly entities, i.e., a => b; c => > a where all objects are unlimited poly and b is a string. > - allocate() in this context > > Patch dependencies: > none > > Comments, concerns, candy welcome! > > Regards, > Andre > > On Sun, 17 Aug 2014 14:32:21 +0200 > domi...@lps.ens.fr (Dominique Dhumieres) wrote: > > > > the testcase should check that the code generated is actually working, > > > not just that the ICE disappeared. > > > > I agree. Note that there is a test in the comment 3 of PR60255 that > > can be used to check the run time behavior (and possibly check the > > vtab issue). > > > > Dominique > > > -- > Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de > > > > -- > The knack of flying is learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. > --Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy
