As far as I can tell, the problem in 62242 (and possibly 62246) is with a string array constructor trying to deal with an array element whose value is a character function that is described in an interface block and which has an assumed-length result. I can't claim more than a superficial understanding of the code, but this patch seems to work. I ran make check-fortran, and I saw no regressions.
Index: gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
===================================================================
--- gcc/fortran/ChangeLog (revision 226427)
+++ gcc/fortran/ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1877,6 +1877,12 @@
* interface.c (is_procptr_result): New function to check if an
expression is a procedure-pointer result.
(compare_actual_formal): Use it.
+
+2015_07-31
+
+ PR fortran/62242
+ * trans-array.c (gfc_add_loop_ss_code): String array constructor:
+ Don't try to convert string length unless it's constant.
^L
Copyright (C) 2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Index: gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/fortran/trans-array.c (revision 226427)
+++ gcc/fortran/trans-array.c (working copy)
@@ -2589,7 +2589,8 @@ gfc_add_loop_ss_code (gfc_loopinfo * loop, gfc_ss
if (expr->ts.type == BT_CHARACTER
&& ss_info->string_length == NULL
&& expr->ts.u.cl
- && expr->ts.u.cl->length)
+ && expr->ts.u.cl->length
+ && expr->ts.u.cl->length->expr_type == EXPR_CONSTANT)
{
gfc_init_se (&se, NULL);
gfc_conv_expr_type (&se, expr->ts.u.cl->length,
string_array_constructor_1.f90
Description: Binary data
string_array_constructor_2.f90
Description: Binary data
