Re: [Patch] Fortran: Fix assumed-size to assumed-rank passing [PR94070]

2021-09-27 Thread Tobias Burnus
Hi Harald, hi all, On 27.09.21 21:34, Harald Anlauf via Gcc-patches wrote: [...] here is what I played with: program p implicit none integer, pointer :: x(:,:) allocate (x(-3:3,4:0)) print *, "lbound =", lbound (x) call sub (x) contains subroutine sub (y) integer, pointer

[PATCH, RFH] PR 102458 - simplification of SIZE intrinsic applied to automatic array

2021-09-27 Thread Harald Anlauf via Fortran
Dear Fortranner, while looking at an issue that bugged me when analyzing PR 102458, I got sort of stuck at the following case: subroutine s4 integer, parameter :: n = 4 integer:: x(transfer(n, n)) = 1 integer:: y(2*int(n) - n) = 2 integer, parameter :: k = size (

Aw: Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/102458 - ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-27 Thread Harald Anlauf via Fortran
Hi Thomas, > > Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for mainline? > > It was actually 10.1.12 :-) dang, you're right. Steve had it right, and I failed miserably on copy&paste. I should fix the comment. > OK for trunk. > > Thanks for the patch! Thanks for the review, which came after Jerry's!

[committed] libgomp.oacc-fortran/privatized-ref-2.f90: Fix dg-note (was: [Patch] Fortran: Fix assumed-size to assumed-rank passing [PR94070])

2021-09-27 Thread Tobias Burnus
On 27.09.21 14:07, Tobias Burnus wrote: now committed r12-3897-g00f6de9c69119594f7dad3bd525937c94c8200d0 I accidentally changed dg-note to dg-message when updating the expected output, as the dump has changed. (Copying seemingly the sorry line instead of the dg-note lines as template.) Changed

Re: [Patch] Fortran: Fix assumed-size to assumed-rank passing [PR94070]

2021-09-27 Thread Tobias Burnus
Hi Thomas, hi Harald, hi all, now committed r12-3897-g00f6de9c69119594f7dad3bd525937c94c8200d0 with the following changes: * Removed now unused gfor_fndecl_size0/gfor_fndecl_size1 (trans{-decl.c,.h}) * Add a scan-dump-not check for those. See below for some comments. On 24.09.21 22:38, Thomas K