--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-31 07:51 ---
Subject: Bug 27900
Author: pault
Date: Sun Dec 31 07:51:47 2006
New Revision: 120296
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=120296
Log:
2006-12-31 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR fortran
--- Comment #11 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-12-30 18:15 ---
Subject: Bug number PR27900
A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker.
The mailing list url for the patch is
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2006-12/msg01874.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/s
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-12-30 18:14 ---
Patch just submitted.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
As
--- Comment #9 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-18 20:52
---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Since you are actively working on this, I have reassigned it to you. I hope
> that's OK?
It was OK, but I spent time looking at it and looking again, and I can't figure
it out. Unassig
--- Comment #8 from paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2006-10-05 16:17 ---
Subject: Re: ICE using intrinsics as arguments
FX
>That bug is fixed by my submitted patch about INTRINSICS
>(http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-10/msg00022.html).
>
>
>
>
I'll review it tomorrow - I am going to
--- Comment #7 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-05 08:05
---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I am glad to see that you are pursuing that one. I nearly bust my head on it
> my notes indicate that I had a fix that broke everything else; no details, so
> not much help I'm afraid.
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-05 07:45 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> FX,
> > When the len in "call sub(len)" is resolved, it is never given its correct
> > return type, which leads to the ICE. I still don't understand why the
> > implicit
> > none is doing th
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-03 22:37 ---
FX,
> When the len in "call sub(len)" is resolved, it is never given its correct
> return type, which leads to the ICE. I still don't understand why the implicit
> none is doing this on us... Paul, any idea?
>
..both
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-02 07:39
---
Further reduced testcase (no need for a module):
implicit none
integer i
i = len("123")
call sub(len)
end
When the len in "call sub(len)" is resolved, it is never given its correct
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-01 15:02
---
I'm about to submit a patch that globally fixes this problem of intrinsics as
actual arguments, but this one is still eluding me. It's due to the "implicit
none" statement, and it works otherwise.
--
fxcoudert
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-06 04:28 ---
Since I took on the other, similar bug, I might as well do this one too!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-06-05 20:33 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> I am not sure whether the code snippet is legal at all, but it should emit an
> error, not an ICE.
Klaus,
It is legal and should compile OK.
It is related to PR27554 and various predecesso
12 matches
Mail list logo
