--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.3.3 |4.5.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38471
--
rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.3.3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38471
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-22 21:55 ---
All routes to deal with this are way too invasive for this stage in the
proceedings. This PR must wait for the array descriptor upgrade, so I am
suspending it for now.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 16:18 ---
Created an attachment (id=16885)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16885&action=view)
pointer_assign_7.f90 - a test cae
As fj pointed out: This PR might be a duplicate of PR 34640. The patch looks
q
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 11:21 ---
This cures the ICE and allows correct code within the subroutine. 'span' is
not transferred in the call and so wrong code is produced if the pointer is
subsequently used in the caller.
I can apply it if you like.
Pa
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 10:52 ---
Tobias,
It's a bit tough to call it a regression, since the earlier versions of
gfortran produced wrong code.
Is this worth fixing for 4.4? If we get the array descriptor business sorted
out, it should go away.
Chee
--- Comment #4 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 10:12 ---
integer, dimension(:), pointer :: ipn
ipn=>sorb%i%j
I tried it with ipn being no dummy argument and it crashes as well.
And I forgot to write the name of the initial reporter in comment 0. The credit
for fin
