https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60500
Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2)
> possibly the L.1 label is misplaced? At least the result would crash if
> malloc returned NULL.
>
Mmh, yes; it seems L.1 should come after the (default-)initialization of the
just allocated array.
There is nothing that can be done inside gfc_trans_allocate, because
initialization comes from a frontend-generated statement after the allocate
statement (introduced at revision r164305).
