On 10/2/21 2:28 PM, Harald Anlauf wrote:
Hi Tobias,
the corrected attached patch fixes the regression for testcase
default_initialization_3.f90 for me now, and as a bonus matches
the description.
Me too! I'm also seeing clean test results now.
-Sandra
Hi Tobias,
the corrected attached patch fixes the regression for testcase
default_initialization_3.f90 for me now, and as a bonus matches
the description.
Am 02.10.21 um 21:56 schrieb Tobias Burnus:
Hi Harald,
unfortunately, your email did not arrive at fortran@gcc.gnu.org – nor at
my private
Hi Tobias,
the corrected attached patch fixes the regression for testcase
default_initialization_3.f90 for me now, and as a bonus matches
the description.
Am 02.10.21 um 21:56 schrieb Tobias Burnus:
Hi Harald,
unfortunately, your email did not arrive at fortran@gcc.gnu.org – nor at
my private
Hi Harald,
unfortunately, your email did not arrive at fortran@gcc.gnu.org – nor at my
private address.
I copied it from
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-October/580794.html
You wrote:
>/I do not see this error. Can you double check that you indeed use the />/posted patch: />//>
On 02.10.21 20:01, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
On 9/29/21 2:53 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
There are three issues, this patch solves the first:
* reject-valid issue due to adding the initializer also to a dummy
argument which is in an INTERFACE block. Having initializers in
INTERFACE blocks is po
On 9/29/21 2:53 AM, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Found when looking at F2018:C839 / PR54753.
For INTENT(OUT) the dummy variable (might) also be default initialized
or deallocated. However, with assumed rank, that causes issues, which
C839 prevents. In the current GCC implementation, missing C839 constra