[Bug fortran/99349] ICE in match_data_constant, at fortran/decl.c:426

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99349 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Priority|P3

[Bug fortran/99351] ICE in gfc_finish_var_decl, at fortran/trans-decl.c:695

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99351 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-03-03 Ever confirmed|

[Bug fortran/95644] [F2018] IEEE_FMA is missing from the IEEE_ARITHMETIC module

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/95644] [F2018] IEEE_FMA is missing from the IEEE_ARITHMETIC module

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644 --- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #8) > > Short of someone diving in, there is always the kludge of ... > This is a better kludge, but is far from the correct approach as gfortran should use the __

[Bug fortran/99506] internal compiler error: in record_reference, at cgraphbuild.c:64

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99506 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/99561] gfortran reports an error for a truncation that is permitted by the standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99561 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNC

[Bug fortran/99561] gfortran reports an error for a truncation that is permitted by the standard

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99561 --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #1) > (In reply to Michal Paszta from comment #0) > > In this line of code: > > > > INTEGER(KIND=1) :: var8 = 257_2 > > > > we try to cast an integer of kind 2 (16

[Bug fortran/99609] Pure Function that has a Variable with Value Attribute that is modified

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99609 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/99711] Crash when reading an allocated character array in namelist

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99711 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug libfortran/99740] floating point exception in rand() in gfortran

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99740 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/96013] ICE in write_symbol, at fortran/module.c:5747

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96013 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/96013] ICE in write_symbol, at fortran/module.c:5747

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96013 --- Comment #10 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #9) > > > Sometime the test ICE with > > > > > > f951: internal compiler error: gfc_code2string(): Bad code > > > > > > which cannot be fixed by the

[Bug fortran/99840] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_simplify_matmul, at fortran/simplify.c:4777

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99840 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/99853] ICE: Cannot convert 'LOGICAL(4)' to 'INTEGER(8)' (etc.)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99853 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libfortran/98301] random_init() is broken

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #49770|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/99922] Bind(C) with assumed length character should work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99922 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-04-06 Status|

[Bug fortran/63797] Bogus ambiguous reference to 'sqrt'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63797 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug fortran/100094] Undefined pointers have incorrect rank when using optimization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100094 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/69360] loop optimization produces invalid code when a common array has dimension 1 in some files

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69360 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/96013] ICE in write_symbol, at fortran/module.c:5747

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96013 --- Comment #14 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #13) > The following variant gives an ICE > >type t >end type > contains >function f() result(t) > character(3) :: c > c = 'a

[Bug fortran/100149] Seg fault passing to CHARACTER(*), DIMENSION(*), INTENT(IN), OPTIONAL

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100149 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/100235] 10.3.0 Performance regressions for compile-time math intrinsics computation on arrays

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100235 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/97571] long parsing phase for simple array constructor

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97571 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug target/18469] configure incorrectly defines gid_t

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18469 Bug 18469 depends on bug 21481, which changed state. Bug 21481 Summary: crtstuff.c should not include auto-host.h https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21481 What|Removed |Added --

[Bug bootstrap/21481] crtstuff.c should not include auto-host.h

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21481 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Status|NEW

[Bug target/36062] -mpc32,-mpc64, and -mpc80 are not documented properly

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36062 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--

[Bug other/51678] 'make pdf' is broken in libiberty

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51678 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--

[Bug middle-end/54771] scan-ipa-dump failure in gfortran.dg/pr48636.f90

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54771 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--

[Bug fortran/97320] False positive "Array reference out of bounds in loop" in a protecting if block

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97320 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/95847] [9/10/11 Regression] Internal error when processing pFUnit generated files with --coverage

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95847 --- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #5) > I can only confirm it's a Fortran issue. > Can please anybody from Fortran folks take a look? First, the caveat, the Fortran code in the attached exampl

[Bug fortran/98016] Host association problem

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98016 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Index: gcc/gcc/fortran/expr.c === --- gcc/gcc/fortran/expr.c (revision 280157) +++ gcc/gcc/fortran/expr.c (working copy) @@

[Bug fortran/98023] ICE: free_expr0(): Bad expr type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98023 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/98046] lock in libpthread occurs with gcc-fortran and atlas-lapack

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98046 --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- > This problem was originally reported on > https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-general-1/lock-in-libpthread- > occurs-only-on-one-arch-installation-only-with-gcc-fortran-4175685889/ > b

[Bug libfortran/98129] Failure on reading big chunk of /dev/urandom

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98129 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug libfortran/98129] Failure on reading big chunk of /dev/urandom

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98129 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/98201] CSQRT function gives bad resuts at runtime

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98201 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/98201] CSQRT function gives bad resuts at runtime

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98201 --- Comment #12 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to dpozar from comment #11) > Thomas, > > that looks good. But I am not sure how to proceed ... > > dave Well, the first thing to do is to use either nm or objdump on the executable cr

[Bug fortran/98022] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_assign_data_value, at fortran/data.c:468 since r9-3803-ga5fbc2f36a291cbe

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98022 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/98253] Conflicting random_seed/random_init results

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/98253] Conflicting random_seed/random_init results

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253 --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- On 2nd thought. Of course, the results are different. In your first example, you have call random_init(repeatable=.true., image_distinct=.true.) which gets you processor-dependent seeds. In y

[Bug fortran/98253] Conflicting random_seed/random_init results

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253 --- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Third thought. Here are the programs you meant to write (without error checking such as how_to_use_random_init must be run before how_to_seed_with_random_seed_like_random_init). program how_to_use

[Bug fortran/98253] Conflicting random_seed/random_init results

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98253 --- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #4) > Invalid expectation? Not sure. This long response was composed before I saw Damian's reply. At the risk of starting an existential argument, I

[Bug fortran/98284] ICE in get_array_index

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98284 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libfortran/98301] New: random_init() may be non-conforming

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301 Bug ID: 98301 Summary: random_init() may be non-conforming Product: gcc Version: 10.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: libfortran

[Bug libfortran/98301] random_init() may be non-conforming

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301 --- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 49770 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49770&action=edit random_init() patch

[Bug libfortran/98301] random_init() may be non-conforming

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRM

[Bug libfortran/98301] random_init() may be non-conforming

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug fortran/97210] Intrinsic function get_team() does not work

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97210 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug fortran/96711] Internal Compiler Error on NINT() Function

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96711 --- Comment #19 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Andreas Schwab from comment #18) > Any ICE is a bug. If powerpc64 does not have REAL(16), then you'll need to xfail the test.

[Bug libfortran/98301] random_init() is broken

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301 --- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 49791 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49791&action=edit new diff with improvements New diff with a better implementation.

[Bug fortran/92065] [8/9/10/11 Regression] internal compiler error: in expand_expr_real_1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92065 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug libfortran/98301] random_init() is broken

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98301 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 49816 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49816&action=edit Newest patch. This new patch implements Thomas idea of generating appropriate library calls for the d

[Bug fortran/49278] ICE (segfault) when combining DATA with default initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49278 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/49278] ICE (segfault) when combining DATA with default initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49278 --- Comment #24 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to anlauf from comment #21) > > And after fixing an obvious NULL pointer dereference, > > diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c > index 37a0c85fa30..783a0bbdd

[Bug fortran/49278] ICE (segfault) when combining DATA with default initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49278 --- Comment #27 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to anlauf from comment #26) > (In reply to kargl from comment #23) > > (In reply to anlauf from comment #21) > > > There's also valid code that ICEs, and invalid code that is silently > >

[Bug fortran/98433] double free detected in tcache 2, after merge of structures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98433 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/98433] double free detected in tcache 2, after merge of structures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98433 --- Comment #6 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- > @Steve: that's pretty basic F2003 stuff, almost TR15581... Yes, I know. Point being that quoting some third-party interpretation of what one version of the Fortran standard says is of limited

[Bug fortran/98454] Apparent wrong initialization in function result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98454 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug fortran/98454] Apparent wrong initialization in function result

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98454 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to anlauf from comment #2) > I think there already exists at least one PR with issues with initializers. > > A reduced testcase shows that default initialization works for intent(out), >

[Bug fortran/98458] PRINT the array constructed from implied do-loop throw ICE

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98458 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/98490] Unexpected out of bounds in array constructor with implied do loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98490 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/98490] Unexpected out of bounds in array constructor with implied do loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98490 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Status|WAITING

[Bug fortran/96986] [8/9/10/11 Regression] Explicit interface required: volatile argument for ENTRY subroutine

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96986 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/98517] gfortran segfault on character array initialization from parameter value since r8-5900-g266404a8d62b99ab

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98517 --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- diff --git a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c index 249f402b8d9..da8e3b63249 100644 --- a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c +++ b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c @@ -12437,7 +12437,8 @@ resolve_charlen (gfc_

[Bug fortran/98517] gfortran segfault on character array initialization from parameter value since r8-5900-g266404a8d62b99ab

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98517 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4

[Bug fortran/98558] Scalar character parameter does not print warning if actual length >1

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98558 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/98577] Wrong "count_rate" values with int32 and real32 if the "count" argument is int64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98577 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/98577] Wrong "count_rate" values with int32 and real32 if the "count" argument is int64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98577 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|WONTFIX |INVALID --- Comment #9 from ka

[Bug fortran/98577] Wrong "count_rate" values with int32 and real32 if the "count" argument is int64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98577 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|WONTFIX |INVALID --- Comment #11 from k

[Bug fortran/98577] Wrong "count_rate" values with int32 and real32 if the "count" argument is int64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98577 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|WONTFIX |INVALID --- Comment #14 from k

[Bug fortran/98577] Wrong "count_rate" values with int32 and real32 if the "count" argument is int64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98577 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|WONTFIX |INVALID --- Comment #16 from k

[Bug fortran/98577] Wrong "count_rate" values with int32 and real32 if the "count" argument is int64.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98577 --- Comment #21 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Chinoune from comment #20) > won't fix. This is hilarious! Now, I know why you are so confused. >From your code in comment #2 call system_clock( t1, count_rate_r32 ) c = matmul(

[Bug fortran/89204] -floop-interchange has no effect on Fortran code

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89204 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/98701] I compiled a program with gfortran on Mac (Big Sur, version 11.1) and g77 on Windows 10. I get two very different results for identical input files with the results from the one c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98701 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/98701] I compiled a program with gfortran on Mac (Big Sur, version 11.1) and g77 on Windows 10. I get two very different results for identical input files with the results from the one c

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98701 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|UNC

[Bug fortran/98883] Module variable not initialized with -finit-real

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98883 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P4 |P5 CC|

[Bug fortran/98948] unexpected error in procedure pointer initialization or assignment with intrinsic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98948 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug fortran/98948] unexpected error in procedure pointer initialization or assignment with intrinsic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98948 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-02-03 Ever confirmed|

[Bug fortran/95647] operator(.eq.) and operator(==) treated differently

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95647 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/99036] [11 Regression] ICE in gfc_current_interface_head, at fortran/interface.c:4699

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99036 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/99061] [10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_conv_intrinsic_atan2d, at fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:4728

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99061 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org Las

[Bug fortran/99060] [9/10/11 Regression] ICE in gfc_match_varspec, at fortran/primary.c:2411

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99060 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2021-02-10 Ever confirmed|

[Bug fortran/99139] ICE: gfc_get_default_type(): Bad symbol '__tmp_UNKNOWN_0_rank_1'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99139 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org Las

[Bug fortran/99256] ICE in variable_check, at fortran/check.c:1012

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99256 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/86206] ICE in gfc_resolve_forall, at fortran/resolve.c:9989

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86206 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/100440] allocated() gives True for unallocated variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100440 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/100440] allocated() gives True for unallocated variable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100440 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- David, On amd64-*-freebsd, I see % gfcx -o z -O2 -fcheck=all allocate_error.f95 % ./z Sample 10. Eigenvalue from matrix powers. Iterationeigenvalue approximation 0 1.

[Bug fortran/93963] Select rank mishandling allocatable and pointer arguments with bind(c)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93963 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/100662] intrinsic::ieee_arithmetic fails on aarch, powerpc architectures on FreeBSD

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100662 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 CC|

[Bug fortran/100855] pow run time gfortran vs ifort

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100855 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4 Last reconfirmed|

[Bug fortran/100870] Constant expression for bind(C) name in interface body not importable

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100870 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC|

[Bug fortran/86694] gfortran rejects character parameter binding label

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86694 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ehlert at thch dot uni-bonn.de

[Bug fortran/86694] gfortran rejects character parameter binding label

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86694 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C

[Bug fortran/100954] writing to a character opens unit -10

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100954 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/100950] ICE in output_constructor_regular_field, at varasm.c:5514

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=100950 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/97345] FE passes do_subscript leaks gmp memory

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=97345 --- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to anlauf from comment #2) > + > + mpz_clear (do_start); > + mpz_clear (do_end); > + mpz_clear (do_step); > } Harald, when I was looking at this PR

[Bug fortran/108369] FM509 Fails to compile with error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108369 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|WAITING |NEW CC|

[Bug fortran/108369] FM509 Fails to compile with error

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108369 --- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to anlauf from comment #1) > (In reply to Ben Brewer from comment #0) > Workaround: either use -std=legacy or fix the above argument declaration to: > > CHARACTER C1D001(*)*8,CVD00

[Bug fortran/108431] Loop variable reaching integer `huge` causes infinte loop

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108431 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/108527] [13 Regression] ICE in compare_bound_int(): Bad expression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108527 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >