https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113845
--- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #5)
> I'm wondering if we need to worry about other actual
> arguments. I note
>
> subroutine test_adjustl(x)
> character(*) :: x(100)
>x = adjustl(x)
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113845
--- Comment #5 from Steve Kargl ---
On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 10:06:47PM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> --- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
> Created attachment 57374
> --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113845
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113845
--- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #2)
> (In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> > Thanks. Reduce test case.
> >
> > subroutine test_adjustl(x)
> > character(*) :: x(100)
> > call bar(adjustl(x))
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113845
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #1)
> Thanks. Reduce test case.
>
> subroutine test_adjustl(x)
> character(*) :: x(100)
> call bar(adjustl(x))
> end subroutine
Forcing gfc_simplify_adjustl t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=113845
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
