Hi, >>> OK for the trunk? >> >> yes, the patch looks basically ok to me. Just one thing I did not >> quite understand: >> >> + /* It can happen that the LHS has BT_DERIVED but it is in reality >> + a polymorphic variable. */ >> >> How exactly can it happen that a polymorphic variable is BT_DERIVED? > > I don't know. I commented it and it still works with the new test cases - it > failed with one of them before. Probably some other change in this patch > fixed the issue. As I cannot reproduce it anymore - and as I didn't like it > either, I will remove it.
To me that sounds like a bug - if the symbol is BT_CLASS, then the expr should be BT_CLASS (unless there is further decoration). By chance I also just noticed one such case when debugging PR 57285. If you happen to find out when this occurs or where the problem originates from, that would be very helpful. > OK for the trunk without that bit? Yes, ok. Thanks for the patch, Janus
