https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
Andre Vehreschild changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
Assignee|janus a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #6)
> The two above need some adjustements at translation stage, which defeats the
> purpose of generating the class container using front-end structures only.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #9)
> (In reply to janus from comment #8)
> > Error: Assumed shape array at (1) must be a dummy argument
>
> I suppose s/AS_ASSUMED_SHAPE/AS_DEFERRED/ would d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #9 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to janus from comment #8)
> Error: Assumed shape array at (1) must be a dummy argument
I suppose s/AS_ASSUMED_SHAPE/AS_DEFERRED/ would do for this case, but the
problem remains the same: the original
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #5)
> Index: gcc/fortran/class.c
> ===
> --- gcc/fortran/class.c (revision 201871)
> +++ gcc/fort
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #7 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to janus from comment #5)
> (In reply to janus from comment #4)
> > Will check if this survives a regtest.
>
> Certainly not! At least we need to check if an as is present at all ...
>
>
> Index: g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #6 from Mikael Morin ---
(In reply to janus from comment #3)
> (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #0)
> > Every of the 'a' dummy argument should have its own class container type.
> > This means that we have to discriminate not onl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to janus from comment #3)
> I think in general it's ok to use the same class container type for all of
> them, but we should not fix the array spec of the _data component at compile
> time
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57590
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
11 matches
Mail list logo
