[The following is about Fortran pointers as actual argument to a CFI taking
procedure.]
The issue has been marked as 12/13 regression but the issue is just a
diagnostic one.
To disentangle:
(A) Bogus warning
[Now tracked as middle-end https://gcc.gnu.org/PR108906 ]
Assume:
nullify(p)
ca
Hello Bernhard,
On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 9:20 AM Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
wrote:
> > > * decl.cc: Add EXT_ATTR_NOINLINE, EXT_ATTR_NORETURN, EXT_ATTR_WEAK.
> > > * gfortran.h (ext_attr_id_t): Ditto.
> >
> > We had that discussion recently here..
> > Which of these are required to be recorded to th
I noticed other attributes have been added now. What happened to
target_clones, in particular? (Thanks for working on it.)
Dear all,
as reported by Richard - although without a testcase - we leak
gmp memory in do_subscript(). The attached patch was derived
by inspection of the code pointed at by valgrind and regtested
on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
Committed as obvious as
commit r13-6336-g45f406c4f62e516b58dcda20b5a7aa43f
Hello,
I have just pushed a for PR108923 (a memory leak).
It fixes the small reproducer that I pasted in bugzilla, and I have run
it through the fortran regression testsuite.
More details in the patch.From 545a7d5da5fcc338e29c5241b574ac99d03f4454 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mikael Morin
Dat
Hi Tobias,
Am 24.02.23 um 12:31 schrieb Tobias Burnus:
(B) The attached patch:
With 'intent(out)' there is no reason to do the conversions. While for
nullified
pointers the bounds-conversion loop is skipped, it may still be executed
for undefined
pointers. (Which is usually harmless.) In either
Hi Rimvydas,
Am 24.02.23 um 06:16 schrieb Rimvydas Jasinskas via Gcc-patches:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 10:53 PM Harald Anlauf wrote:
the patch is mostly fine, but there is a minor style issue:
+ if (sym->attr.ext_attr & (1 << EXT_ATTR_WEAK))
+ gfc_error ("Symbol %qs at %L has the WE
