https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78492
--- Comment #8 from federico ---
Amazing, thank you!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114023
federico changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||federico.perini at gmail dot
com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105558
--- Comment #10 from federico ---
Hi Sam,
Thanks for looking into it - here is a simplified version of the test program:
you can also test it live at the Compiler Explorer, at this link:
https://godbolt.org/z/r63G348hM
Thanks,
Federico
modul
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=115542
Bug ID: 115542
Summary: Invalid finalization in derived type containing
allocatable entities
Product: gcc
Version: 14.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111952
Bug ID: 111952
Summary: Allocatable of derived type with DTIO is not
deallocated going out of scope
Product: gcc
Version: 13.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109076
--- Comment #2 from federico ---
Sorry I meant it does not compile what I think is valid code:
subroutine i_expand matches the given abstract interface exactly, I can't find
a shape mismatch. I wound two ways that will make the error go away:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109076
Bug ID: 109076
Summary: class extending abstract type with deferred
procedures, with another unrelated procedure
interface, crashes on valid code
Product: gcc
Ve
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108431
federico changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108431
Bug ID: 108431
Summary: Loop variable reaching integer `huge` causes infinte
loop
Product: gcc
Version: 12.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106731
--- Comment #11 from federico ---
Thank you.
I can confirm the patch works.
I thought that, while fixing the issue, removing the assert was not the best
solution as automatic arrays are not supposed to be static. My bad.
Happy holidays,
Fe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107489
Bug ID: 107489
Summary: Runtime segfault in finalization routine of derived
type with allocatable components
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
S
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107362
--- Comment #4 from federico ---
OK I will report a new bug.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107362
federico changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||federico.perini at gmail dot
com
--- Commen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107157
Bug ID: 107157
Summary: Weird out-of-bounds error with multiple move_alloc's
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Comp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106790
Bug ID: 106790
Summary: Weird SIGSEV using polymorphic routine with "select
type" and optimization (-O3)
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Sever
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106750
--- Comment #3 from federico ---
Thank you for checking this.
So if I make the temporary array explicit, the leak goes away.
In the case of the example i.e. 1) fixed-size and 2) very few elements are
passed to the routine, it seems it would j
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106771
--- Comment #5 from federico ---
My bad, the SEGFAULT is my mistake, I've made a half-baked example that does
not work. Here's the fixed one:
module test
implicit none
type::t
integer, allocatable :: iloc(:)
contains
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106771
--- Comment #3 from federico ---
Right: here is a version where the object is initialized:
https://godbolt.org/z/o566cPG8P
I also see that for the versions that compile (e.g., 11.1.0), there's a weird
SEGFAULT error at this line:
eleme
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106771
Bug ID: 106771
Summary: [OOP] ICE with PACK intrinsic, in
gfc_conv_expr_descriptor, at
fortran/trans-array.c:7328
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106750
Bug ID: 106750
Summary: Memory leak calling section of derived type containing
`allocatable` entries
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106731
--- Comment #6 from federico ---
Yeah this popped up playing with DTIO, this feature is not widely used
apparently. I'll also try to get a copy of the gcc source code and build
pipeline to see if I can help.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106731
--- Comment #4 from federico ---
The TREE_STATIC assert should be valid according to what reported in the
implementation at report https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48298
But, I can't tell what that means.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106731
--- Comment #2 from federico ---
For the sake of completeness, fixed-size does not cause an ICE:
type(t) :: fixed(5) ! works
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106731
Bug ID: 106731
Summary: ICE on automatic array of derived type with DTIO
Product: gcc
Version: 12.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Componen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106367
Bug ID: 106367
Summary: ICE in fold_convert_loc.c when referencing an
array-of-structure-eleents from within a polymorphic
function
Product: gcc
Version: 11.3.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78492
--- Comment #6 from federico ---
I've attached a simple test program that confirms ICE on gfortran 11.3.0.
ICE is returned only if
- the non_overridable procedure is part of a generic type-bound interface
- that same generic is being called from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78492
--- Comment #5 from federico ---
Created attachment 53145
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=53145&action=edit
test program: call non_overridable function from generic interface within
polymorphic procedure
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105558
--- Comment #3 from federico ---
-fno-vect-cost model also does not change behavior on gcc 11/7/6/5 (all OK)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105558
--- Comment #2 from federico ---
Ok so we have:
gfortran | [...] -fno-tree-vectorize | [...] -fno-vect-cost-model
10.3 |OK | ERROR
9.3 |OK | ERROR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105558
Bug ID: 105558
Summary: simple 8-byte integer calculation fails with -O3 /
march=core-avx2 on some gfortran 8/9/10 versions
Product: gcc
Version: 10.3.0
Status: UNCONFIR
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104927
federico changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104927
Bug ID: 104927
Summary: Invalid array size specification accepted
Product: gcc
Version: 10.3.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fort
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101757
--- Comment #2 from federico ---
Tested on godbolt.org:
https://godbolt.org/z/sPsdE6Y3W
works on: 5.5, 6.3, all 10, all 11
error on: all 7, all 8, all 9
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101757
--- Comment #1 from federico ---
Actually, the results are not "off-seted": whatever was to be set to 0 is
properly set; values that should be set "+1" are given "-1" instead:
itest(1)= 0 itest(2)=-1
test(1)= F test(2)= T
Federico
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101757
Bug ID: 101757
Summary: Simple integer assigment fails (off-seted by -1) when
compiling with -O3
Product: gcc
Version: 7.1.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: norm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59202
--- Comment #4 from federico ---
The self-assignment issue is present even if the derived type has no
allocatable components. Here is a sample test program that gives an error with
gfortran 10.2.0:
module assign
implicit none
pr
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59202
federico changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||federico.perini at gmail dot
com
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98558
federico changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |INVALID
Status|WAITING
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98558
Bug ID: 98558
Summary: Scalar character parameter does not print warning if
actual length >1
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97380
--- Comment #4 from federico ---
I've attached another program that perhaps highlights the problem better.
Even just *accessing* a polymorphic array with an array causes wrong output
with gfortran 9.2.0:
The attached program sends elements [3,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97380
--- Comment #3 from federico ---
Created attachment 49392
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49392&action=edit
Other test program highlights issue in accessing polymorphic arrays with arrays
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97455
Bug ID: 97455
Summary: ICE on invalid code (wrong pointer assignment) in
SELECT TYPE construct
Product: gcc
Version: 9.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97380
--- Comment #2 from federico ---
I have an update:
if I remove the ELEMENTAL property from the assignment routines, I get this
error in both the PACK and the array assignments:
Error: Nonallocatable variable must not be polymorphic in intrins
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97380
Bug ID: 97380
Summary: polymorphic array assignment for `PACK`: ICE and
runtime segfaults
Product: gcc
Version: 10.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
44 matches
Mail list logo
