https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #16 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
> Given that 7.5 will be the final 7-release, I find it too risky to
> introduce potential new regressions. If nobody objects, we might
> close this PR. (Target milestone 8.4?)
Makes sense for me.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #14 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: anlauf
Date: Sat Mar 2 16:08:03 2019
New Revision: 269342
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269342&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-03-02 Harald Anlauf
Backport from trunk
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #13 from Harald Anlauf ---
On 03/02/19 12:48, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
>
> Dominique d'Humieres changed:
>
>What|Removed |Added
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
--- Comment #12 from Domi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #11 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: anlauf
Date: Sun Feb 24 20:03:28 2019
New Revision: 269177
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269177&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2019-02-24 Harald Anlauf
PR fortran/89266
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #10 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #9)
> A patch that does this has been posted here:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2019-02/msg00153.html
This patch also fixes PR88326.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #9 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #8)
> I have a 'half-patch' that tries to change gfc_target_expr_size()
> to return a bool which is true for success and false for failure,
> and then deal with this re
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #8 from Harald Anlauf ---
It's not as trivial as I had hoped.
The point is that gfc_element_size() and gfc_target_expr_size()
are returning size 0 for the source expression, which is an entirely
correct value. However, they also ret
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #7 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #6)
> The problem might be here:
>
> check.c: gfc_calculate_transfer_sizes
>
> 5482 /* Calculate the size of the source. */
> 5483 *source_size = gfc_targe
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #6 from Harald Anlauf ---
The problem might be here:
check.c: gfc_calculate_transfer_sizes
5482 /* Calculate the size of the source. */
5483 *source_size = gfc_target_expr_size (source);
5484 if (*source_size == 0)
5
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #5 from Harald Anlauf ---
Alternative versions to test case #2:
program test
implicit none
character(1), save :: z = transfer ([''], '*') ! ICE
! character(1), save :: z = transfer ([character(0) :: ''],
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
--- Comment #4 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #1)
> Goes back a long time, at least to gcc 6.
>
> I also think that this is valid code, but if somebody can find
> language in the standard that says otherwise, plea
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89266
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||ice-on-valid-code
Blocks|
17 matches
Mail list logo
