--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-09
22:15 ---
Fixed.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-09
09:06 ---
Subject: Bug 22304
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-09 09:06:09
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: gfortr
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-09-09
00:24 ---
Subject: Bug 22304
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-09-09 00:23:18
Modified files:
gcc/fortran: gfortran.h match.c module.c primary.c
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05 06:08
---
This is amusing.
integer o(4), b, c
COMMON /IBM/ o
EQUIVALENCE (o(1),b),(C,o(4))
o(3)=1
CALL MYSUB1
CALL MYSUB2
END
subroutine MYSUB1
integer o (4
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05 05:47
---
> I am a little busy, but I might be able to try some more.
> However, I have no real experience programming compilers,
> and I don't think I understand the
Join the club!
> intended logic of the algorithm
--- Additional Comments From albertm at uphs dot upenn dot edu 2005-08-03
15:02 ---
Subject: Re: gfortran silently changes values in equilvane
nce'd variables
Greetings!
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From paulthomas2 at wanadoo
--- Additional Comments From paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2005-08-03
07:06 ---
Mike,
As I promised on the fortran list, I am about to tackle module equivalences.
Since there are clearly associated issues with equivalences in general, I need
to come to grips with those too.
Your con
--- Additional Comments From albertm at uphs dot upenn dot edu 2005-07-06
17:26 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
One more bit of speculation. I still think there is an issue with
marking "->used" in gfc_equiv structures. The following change will
make the test case "work", but since I
--- Additional Comments From albertm at uphs dot upenn dot edu 2005-07-06
16:59 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
First, thank you for taking an interest in this issue.
Secondly, if I may speculate, it seems to me that there is a problem
in how gfc_equiv structures are marked as "used"
--- Additional Comments From tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-06
11:32 ---
In this case, we forget the common block name.
>From the .t02.original:
MAIN__ ()
{
static union
{
int4 o[30];
} equiv.0;
equiv.0.o[8] = 1;
mysub ();
}
mysub ()
{
static union
{
--- Additional Comments From albertm at uphs dot upenn dot edu 2005-07-06
05:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=9212)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=9212&action=view)
minimal test case
The bug persists in gcc version 4.1.0 20050702 (experimental)
If I replace:
E
--
What|Removed |Added
Severity|critical|normal
Keywords||wrong-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id
12 matches
Mail list logo
