--- Comment #10 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-02 21:22
---
Fixed.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASS
--- Comment #8 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-18 17:36
---
Subject: Bug 26801
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Sun Jun 18 17:36:47 2006
New Revision: 114757
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=114757
Log:
PR fortran/26801
* trans-intrinsic.c (g
--- Comment #7 from tobias dot burnus at physik dot fu-berlin dot de
2006-06-17 10:57 ---
The test case of comment #4 is invalid as the Fortran standard says that a
pointer is undefined unless it is associated (allocated, assigned) or
deassociated (nullifyed). In this case it is undefin
--- Comment #6 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-16 19:31
---
I'm currently regtesting the following patch:
Index: trans-intrinsic.c
===
--- trans-intrinsic.c (revision 114721)
+++ trans-intrinsic.c (workin
--- Comment #5 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 20:21
---
The patch I proposed is wrong. We need to call gfc_evaluate_now. The question
is to know why, in this precise case, the block of code we're building
(se->pre) seems to be dropped later on (both the call that sets
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-07 10:55
---
The extra variable is generated from the call to gfc_evaluate_now around line
1970 of trans-array.c (the call is "indexse.expr = gfc_evaluate_now
(indexse.expr, &se->pre)").
I'm not sure yet if it's the right sol
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-05-28 13:23
---
I tried with the following reduced testcase:
implicit none
integer :: i
logical :: l
type dt
integer, pointer :: a => null()
end type dt
type(dt), pointer :: obj(:) => null()
allocate(obj(2))
--- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-03-22 21:22 ---
Confirmed, but I don't see could not figure out why the segfault is there.
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from sfilippone at uniroma2 dot it 2006-03-22 12:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=11094)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=11094&action=view)
test case
Note: the code segfaults even if the first do loop (before allocating the %a
components) is commented
