https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64933
Paul Thomas <pault at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Paul Thomas <pault at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #2)
> Up to revision r219797 (2015-01-17), I get the error
>
> pr64933.f90:5:31:
>
> ASSOCIATE(should_work=>char_var)
> 1
> Error: Associate-name 'should_work' at (1) is used as array
>
> Starting at r219823 (2015-01-18) I get the ICE. Likely a fall out of r219814
> (pr55901). Please feel free to mark this PR as a 5.0 regression.
Hmm! I am not sure that it can be regarded as a regression, since the original
error was wrong. I agree that an ICE is worse.... -ish.
I'll take it though, regression or not.
Paul
