https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44868
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org
Tar
--- Comment #7 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-21 22:08 ---
Close as fixed. I also do no longer see any valgrind errors.
BD, if you still see an ICE, please feel free to reopen this bug (or fill a new
one).
--
burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Re
--- Comment #6 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-07-18 10:22 ---
> Dominique, I think you're compiling the wrong code.
Yes, it was the invalid version in pr44869. With the code in comment #0 I also
get
Error: 'add' at (1) is not a member of the 'test_suite' structure
without ICE
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-18 09:23 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> At revision 162276, I get
>
> pr44868.f90:245.24:
>
> tst_case => self%list(i)
> 1
> Error: Pointer assignment target is neither TARGET nor POINTER at (1
--- Comment #4 from bdsatish at gmail dot com 2010-07-17 15:51 ---
Yes Janus, Dominique. The diagnosis is correct. The error messages are valid. I
think this PR can be closed.
(In reply to comment #3)
> At revision 162276, I get
>
>
> pr44868.f90:245.24:
>
> tst_case => s
--- Comment #3 from dominiq at lps dot ens dot fr 2010-07-17 15:47 ---
At revision 162276, I get
pr44868.f90:245.24:
tst_case => self%list(i)
1
Error: Pointer assignment target is neither TARGET nor POINTER at (1)
pr44868.f90:231.24:
ts
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-17 15:35 ---
At r162275, I'm neither seeing the ICE nor any valgrind errors. Can anyone
confirm this?
[My guess is that it has been fixed by the recent cleanup of generics, i.e.
r162125.]
--
janus at gcc dot gnu dot org change
--- Comment #1 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-08 10:33 ---
See also PR 44869.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44868
