------- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-30 07:49 ------- (In reply to comment #5) > Erik, Paul, as authors of the original patch and testcases, can you confirm my > conclusion that the code in comment #4 (and thus, the > gfortran.dg/alloc_comp_constructor_1.f90 testcase) is not legal, for the > reason > I indicate in the comment? > Sorry - I missed this discussion compeletly.
Tobias' analysis is correct. It is legal. In functional terms, the descriptor with its null pointer is passed to the descriptor field of the derived type. Cheers Paul -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34143
