[Bug fortran/31550] [regression] f951: segfault in fold-const.c:1963

2007-04-13 Thread dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #9 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-13 17:07 --- *** Bug 31551 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31550

[Bug fortran/31550] [regression] f951: segfault in fold-const.c:1963

2007-04-13 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-13 17:03 --- Fixed. Phew! Paul -- pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|

[Bug fortran/31550] [regression] f951: segfault in fold-const.c:1963

2007-04-13 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-13 17:02 --- Subject: Bug 31550 Author: pault Date: Fri Apr 13 17:01:36 2007 New Revision: 123791 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=123791 Log: 2007-04-13 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/

[Bug fortran/31550] [regression] f951: segfault in fold-const.c:1963

2007-04-13 Thread patchapp at dberlin dot org
--- Comment #6 from patchapp at dberlin dot org 2007-04-13 14:21 --- Subject: Bug number PR31550 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/2007-04/msg00788.html -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/sh

[Bug fortran/31550] [regression] f951: segfault in fold-const.c:1963

2007-04-13 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-13 13:32 --- Daniel, This turns out to be a problem of carts and horses. I very rapidly found that I could fix this problem and break everything else by reversing the order of the gfc_derived_types list. After much head scratchi

[Bug fortran/31550] [regression] f951: segfault in fold-const.c:1963

2007-04-12 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-13 05:11 --- (In reply to comment #3) > Is this a problem with the backend? Dream on, Mr Thomas! It's my own patch: 2007-03-18 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PR fortran/30531 PR fortran/31086 * symbo.

[Bug fortran/31550] [regression] f951: segfault in fold-const.c:1963

2007-04-12 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-12 19:37 --- What is really odd is that the same code (see below) is produced, with or without the ONLY... It looks fine in either case and identical to that produced by 4.2. *sigh* Is this a problem with the backend? Paul dummy

[Bug fortran/31550] [regression] f951: segfault in fold-const.c:1963

2007-04-12 Thread pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-12 18:52 --- (In reply to comment #1) > Please note, that the USE-ONLY of "dummy_atom_list_merge" is crucial. Without > it, the segfault does not occur. > Confirmed - I have a bad feeling about this one! Paul -- pault at gcc

[Bug fortran/31550] [regression] f951: segfault in fold-const.c:1963

2007-04-12 Thread dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #1 from dfranke at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-12 17:08 --- Please note, that the USE-ONLY of "dummy_atom_list_merge" is crucial. Without it, the segfault does not occur. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31550