https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59398
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59398
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59398
--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres ---
Any progress or should this PR be closed as INVALID?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59398
--- Comment #8 from Sergio Losilla ---
> Steve argues that it does not say whether its actual bounds are a
> characteristic. If you assume that only the shape matters, then
> the gfortran behavior is not a bug. I think it is up to the experts
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59398
--- Comment #7 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #6)
> (In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #1)
> > Thus the assignment from the allocatable function result is broken.
>
> Is it true?
I looked at the discus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59398
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59398
--- Comment #5 from Sergio Losilla ---
(In reply to Harald Anlauf from comment #3)
OK, so we seem to agree that gfortran is not assigning the correct bounds,
right?
> shape(-3:3) == shape (-2:4) == shape(1:7)
>
> Shape is UBOUND-LBOUND+1.
Hm,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59398
--- Comment #4 from Harald Anlauf ---
I also tested the modified case with NAG 5.3.2(951).
It agrees with gfortran.
I now wonder whether there is something special about
allocatable function results.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59398
--- Comment #3 from Harald Anlauf ---
(In reply to Sergio Losilla from comment #2)
> There should be no need to deallocate. From the excerpt you copied: "If the
> variable is an allocated allocatable variable, it is deallocated if expr is
> an arr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59398
--- Comment #2 from Sergio Losilla ---
There should be no need to deallocate. From the excerpt you copied: "If the
variable is an allocated allocatable variable, it is deallocated if expr is an
array of different shape".
For the second, the obtai
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59398
Harald Anlauf changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||anlauf at gmx dot de
--- Comment #1 from
11 matches
Mail list logo