http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48059
--- Comment #9 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com <paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com> 2011-03-11 15:51:31 UTC --- Janus, That looks like the right way to go. Do you understand how this can be a regression, whilst the correct interface mapping was previously not present :-) ? Cheers Paul On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 4:39 PM, janus at gcc dot gnu.org <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48059 > > janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: > > What |Removed |Added > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Status|NEW |ASSIGNED > AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |janus at gcc dot gnu.org > |gnu.org | > > --- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-11 15:39:20 UTC --- > (In reply to comment #7) >> > So, it wants to get at the a_type.length member, but applies the whole >> > thing to a b_type'd variable. >> >> Yes, the base type in the reference is wrong. And the reason for this seems >> to >> be that it is not corrected in the interface mapping. I think we need to >> extend >> 'gfc_apply_interface_mapping_to_ref' to set the correct base type for >> polymorphic arguments. > > The following seems to do the trick (not regtested yet): > > Index: trans-expr.c > =================================================================== > --- trans-expr.c (revision 170870) > +++ trans-expr.c (working copy) > @@ -2247,6 +2247,9 @@ gfc_apply_interface_mapping_to_expr (gfc_interface > expr->symtree = sym->new_sym; > else if (sym->expr) > gfc_replace_expr (expr, gfc_copy_expr (sym->expr)); > + /* Replace base type for polymorphic arguments. */ > + if (expr->ref && expr->ref->type == REF_COMPONENT && sym->expr) > + expr->ref->u.c.sym = sym->expr->ts.u.derived; > } > > /* ...and to subexpressions in expr->value. */ > > -- > Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > You are on the CC list for the bug. >
