Hello Harald,

Thank you for the review. Hold off raising a PR, I'll have a stab at
fixing the new testcase.

Tschuess

Paul

On Thu, 26 Mar 2026 at 19:57, Harald Anlauf <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> the patch fixes the ICE as advertised, so it is OK.
> Thanks for the patch!
>
> There is a small variation of the testcase where the assignment
> leads to too many evaluations of the r.h.s., see attached testcase.
> In this case 3 instead of one; other brands get this right.
>
> Shall I open a separate PR for this problem?
>
> Best,
> Harald
>
> On 3/26/26 15:16, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
> > Hello All,
> >
> > Thanks to Harald for pointing out this low hanging fruit to me.
> >
> > The original ICE has changed to one that is easily identified and
> > fixed: dereferencing a NULL pointer in trans_allocate. This is fixed
> > in the third chunk. In this case, a symtree is now provided by  a
> > modified version of gfc_get_unique symtree, which is the content of
> > the first chunk. Also, deallocation of non-variable, pointer source
> > allocatable components has been suppressed in the second chunk.
> >
> > The resulting behaviour of the testcase has been tested against that
> > of other brands, since it wasn't evident to me from reading the F2018
> > standard that the deep copy of the allocatable component is correct.
> >
> > Regtested on FC43/x86_64 - OK for mainline?
> >
> > Paul

Reply via email to