https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
--- Comment #13 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Sun Dec 4 16:34:13 2016
New Revision: 243230
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243230&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-12-04 Janus Weil
Backport from trunk
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
--- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Sun Dec 4 16:00:27 2016
New Revision: 243229
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=243229&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-12-04 Janus Weil
Backport from trunk
P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
--- Comment #11 from federico ---
Janus,
sure - please take your time!
Opening a new ticket for this further issue.
Thanks,
Federico
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to federico from comment #9)
> I have attached another minimal test to show the compiler's behavior.
> Maybe your fix also fixes this?
Thanks for this new test case, Federico. Unfortuna
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
--- Comment #9 from federico ---
Janus,
thanks for your hard work!
I'm sorry to post another bug / possibly further evidence of the same bug.
When the non_overridable function is part of a generic set, and the generic
binding is called (eith
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
--- Comment #8 from federico ---
Created attachment 40127
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=40127&action=edit
Minimal program to test non_overridable functions in generic type-bound set
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |5.5
--- Comment #7 from janus
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: janus
Date: Tue Nov 22 16:06:46 2016
New Revision: 242703
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=242703&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2016-11-22 Janus Weil
PR fortran/78443
* cla
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mrestelli at gmail dot com
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|ASSIGNED
Resolution|FI
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Indeed this behavior is a bug.
Looking at the dump generated with -fdump-tree-original, it seems that all
typebound-procedure calls are generated as they should be:
* The three calls in the main p
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78443
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Status|
14 matches
Mail list logo