Hi All,
The original bug is fixed as 'obvious' in revision 257938. This is
indeed a regression.
The bug in comments 2 and 7 is fixed in revision 257934. This,
however, is not a regression. The summary will be changed accordingly.
The 'obvious' tag comes about because both bugs have a common origin:
referencing the components of ns->proc_name without testing to see if
it is there.
Should I close this or should I apply the second part to 7-branch?
Cheers
Paul
>>>>>revision 257938:
2018-02-23 Paul Thomas <pa...@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/83149
* trans-types.c (gfc_sym_type): Test sym->ns->proc_name before
accessing its components.
2018-02-23 Paul Thomas <pa...@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/83149
* gfortran.dg/pr83149_b.f90: New test.
* gfortran.dg/pr83149_a.f90: Additional source for previous.
>>>>>revision 257934:
2018-02-23 Paul Thomas <pa...@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/83149
* trans-decl.c (gfc_finish_var_decl): Test sym->ns->proc_name
before accessing its components.
2018-02-23 Paul Thomas <pa...@gcc.gnu.org>
PR fortran/83149
* gfortran.dg/pr83149_1.f90: New test.
* gfortran.dg/pr83149.f90: Additional source for previous.
