[PATCH, committed] PR fortran/101349 - ICE in gfc_get_descriptor_field, at fortran/trans-array.c:140
The check of arguments to ALLOCATE did not properly implement
F2008:C628 / F2018:C932, as it excluded unlimited polymophics,
in contrast to the standard text. Fix this.
Committed Steve's patch as obvious after regtesting on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
Thanks,
Harald
Fortran - correct check for constraint F2008:C628 / F2018:C932
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
PR fortran/101349
* resolve.c (resolve_allocate_expr): An unlimited polymorphic
argument to ALLOCATE must be ALLOCATABLE or a POINTER. Fix the
corresponding check.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR fortran/101349
* gfortran.dg/unlimited_polymorphic_33.f90: New test.
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
index f641d0d4dae..d7aa2868cef 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
@@ -7829,8 +7829,9 @@ resolve_allocate_expr (gfc_expr *e, gfc_code *code, bool *array_alloc_wo_spec)
}
}
- /* Check for F08:C628. */
- if (allocatable == 0 && pointer == 0 && !unlimited)
+ /* Check for F08:C628 (F2018:C932). Each allocate-object shall be a data
+ pointer or an allocatable variable. */
+ if (allocatable == 0 && pointer == 0)
{
gfc_error ("Allocate-object at %L must be ALLOCATABLE or a POINTER",
&e->where);
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/unlimited_polymorphic_33.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/unlimited_polymorphic_33.f90
new file mode 100644
index 000..8bb8864cb26
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/unlimited_polymorphic_33.f90
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! PR fortran/101349 - ICE in gfc_get_descriptor_field
+! Check constraint F2008:C628 / F2018:C932
+
+subroutine s(x)
+ class(*) :: x(:)
+ allocate (x, source=['abc']) ! { dg-error "must be ALLOCATABLE or a POINTER" }
+end
+
+subroutine t(x)
+ class(*), allocatable :: x(:)
+ allocate (x, source=['abc'])
+end
+
+subroutine u(x)
+ class(*), pointer :: x(:)
+ allocate (x, source=['abc'])
+end
[PATCH, committed] PR fortran/102113 - parsing error in assigned goto
A whitespace issue during parsing. Committed Steve's patch as obvious after regtesting on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Thanks, Harald Fortran - fix whitespace issue during parsing of assigned goto gcc/fortran/ChangeLog: PR fortran/102113 * match.c (gfc_match_goto): Allow for whitespace in parsing list of labels. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR fortran/102113 * gfortran.dg/goto_9.f90: New test.
[PATCH] PR fortran/101327 - ICE in find_array_element, at fortran/expr.c:1355
There was an issue when trying to use an element from an array constructor
which was a broken in a way probably only Gerhard could conceive.
We hit an assert that can be replaced by more robust code.
Patch is basically Steve's.
Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for mainline?
Thanks,
Harald
Fortran - improve error recovery determining array element from constructor
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
PR fortran/101327
* expr.c (find_array_element): When bounds cannot be determined as
constant, return error instead of aborting.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR fortran/101327
* gfortran.dg/pr101327.f90: New test.
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/expr.c b/gcc/fortran/expr.c
index 35563a78697..dfecc3012e1 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/expr.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/expr.c
@@ -1337,7 +1337,9 @@ find_array_element (gfc_constructor_base base, gfc_array_ref *ar,
for (i = 0; i < ar->dimen; i++)
{
if (!gfc_reduce_init_expr (ar->as->lower[i])
- || !gfc_reduce_init_expr (ar->as->upper[i]))
+ || !gfc_reduce_init_expr (ar->as->upper[i])
+ || ar->as->upper[i]->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT
+ || ar->as->lower[i]->expr_type != EXPR_CONSTANT)
{
t = false;
cons = NULL;
@@ -1351,9 +1353,6 @@ find_array_element (gfc_constructor_base base, gfc_array_ref *ar,
goto depart;
}
- gcc_assert (ar->as->upper[i]->expr_type == EXPR_CONSTANT
- && ar->as->lower[i]->expr_type == EXPR_CONSTANT);
-
/* Check the bounds. */
if ((ar->as->upper[i]
&& mpz_cmp (e->value.integer,
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr101327.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr101327.f90
new file mode 100644
index 000..f4377aabe7a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr101327.f90
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+! { dg-do compile }
+! PR fortran/101327 - ICE in find_array_element, at fortran/expr.c:1355
+
+subroutine s
+ integer, parameter :: n([2]) = [1, 2] ! { dg-error "must be scalar" }
+ type t
+ integer :: a(n(1):n(2))
+ end type
+end
+
+! { dg-error "cannot be automatic or of deferred shape" " " { target *-*-* } 5 }
Re: *PING**2 – Re: [Patch] Fortran: Fix Bind(C) char-len check, add ptr-contiguous check
Hi Tobias, s/However, as argument they are also iteroperable/However, as an argument they are also interoperable/ s/ /* else: valid only sind F2018 - and an assumed-shape/rank array; however, gfc_notify_std is already called when those array type are used. Thus, silently accept F200x. */ / /* else: valid only since F2018 - and an assumed-shape/rank array; however, gfc_notify_std is already called when those array types are used. Thus, silently accept F200x. */ Apart from those nits, it looks good to me. It even regtests OK :-) Thanks for sorting out the standard-ese. OK for mainline and, I would suggest 11-branch. Cheers Paul On Sun, 29 Aug 2021 at 08:35, Tobias Burnus wrote: > PING**2 > > On 25.08.21 20:58, Tobias Burnus wrote: > > Early *PING*. > > (I also should still review several Fortan patches... There are lots of > > patches waiting for review :-/) > > > > On 20.08.21 19:24, Tobias Burnus wrote: > >> The following is about interoperability (BIND(C)) only. > >> > >> > >> * The patch adds a missing check for pointer + contiguous. > >> (Rejected to avoid copy-in issues? Or checking issues?) > >> > >> > >> * And it corrects an issue regarding len > 1 characters. While > >> > >> subroutine foo(x) > >> character(len=2) :: x(*) > >> > >> is valid Fortran code (the argument can be "abce" or ['a','b','c','d'] > >> or ...) > >> – and would work also with bind(C) as the len=2 does not need to be > >> passed > >> as hidden argument as len is a constant. > >> However, it is not valid nonetheless. > >> > >> > >> OK? Comments? > >> > >> Tobias > >> > >> > >> PS: Referenced locations in the standard (F2018): > >> > >> C1554 If proc-language-binding-spec is specified for a procedure, > >> each of its dummy arguments shall be an interoperable procedure (18.3.6) > >> or a variable that is interoperable (18.3.4, 18.3.5), assumed-shape, > >> assumed-rank, assumed-type, of type CHARACTER with assumed length, > >> or that has the ALLOCATABLE or POINTER attribute. > >> > >> 18.3.1: "... If the type is character, the length type parameter is > >> interoperable if and only if its value is one. ..." > >> > >> "18.3.4 Interoperability of scalar variables": > >> "... A named scalar Fortran variable is interoperable ... if it > >> is of type character12its length is not assumed or declared by > >> an expression that is not a constant expression." > >> > >> 18.3.5: Likewise but for arrays. > >> > >> 18.3.6 "... Fortran procedure interface is interoperable with a C > >> function prototype ..." > >> "(5) any dummy argument without the VALUE attribute corresponds > >> to a formal parameter of the prototype that is of a pointer type, > >> and either > >> • the dummy argument is interoperable with an entity of the > >> referenced type ..." > >> (Remark: those are passed as byte stream) > >> "• the dummy argument is a nonallocatable nonpointer variable of > >> type > >> CHARACTER with assumed character length and the formal > >> parameter is > >> a pointer to CFI_cdesc_t, > >> • the dummy argument is allocatable, assumed-shape, > >> assumed-rank, or > >> a pointer without the CONTIGUOUS attribute, and the formal > >> parameter > >> is a pointer to CFI_cdesc_t, or > >> (Remark: those two use an array descriptor, also for > >> explicit-size/assumed-size > >> arrays or for scalars.) > >> • the dummy argument is assumed-type ..." > >> > > - > > Siemens Electronic Design Automation GmbH; Anschrift: Arnulfstraße > > 201, 80634 München; Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung; > > Geschäftsführer: Thomas Heurung, Frank Thürauf; Sitz der Gesellschaft: > > München; Registergericht München, HRB 106955 > -- "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein
