http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48059
--- Comment #12 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com <paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com> 2011-03-12 16:07:47 UTC --- Ha! That's what I suspected. Good. I'll OK the submission. Thanks Paul PS I'll keep quiet about it being a bit of a dubious "regression" :-) On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 4:57 PM, janus at gcc dot gnu.org <gcc-bugzi...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48059 > > --- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-11 15:57:47 UTC --- > (In reply to comment #9) >> 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 :-) ? > > Well, I think gfortran 4.5 just silently produced wrong code, and then > Michael's patch triggered the ICE (uncovering a bug that had been there > before). > > The dump with my patch shows > > D.1574 = D.1572->_data->a_type.length; > > while 4.5 gives: > > D.1565 = D.1563->$data->length; > > (missing the "a_type" parent reference). > > -- > 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. >
