[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-30 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|U

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-29 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 --- Comment #9 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:27594524d8a93cddb197ad8c9d4075c5870f1473 commit r10-8053-g27594524d8a93cddb197ad8c9d4075c5870f1473 Author: Stefan Schu

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-28 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 --- Comment #8 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Patch posted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-April/544716.html

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-27 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 --- Comment #7 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Since gfc_resolve_dt is a non-static function we cannot assume anything about argument DT. Argument DT gets passed to function check_io_constraints which passes values depending on DT, namely

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-27 Thread sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 --- Comment #6 from Steve Kargl --- On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 05:12:50PM +, tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 > > Thomas Koenig changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-27 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 Thomas Koenig changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-27 Thread sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 --- Comment #4 from Steve Kargl --- On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 06:27:25AM +, stefansf at linux dot ibm.com wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 > > --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus ibm.com> --- > Since one

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-26 Thread stefansf at linux dot ibm.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 --- Comment #3 from Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus --- Since one call chain is gfc_resolve_dt -> check_io_constraints -> compare_to_allowed_values and at least one parameter of compare_to_allowed_values, from which the initialization of variable nu

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-26 Thread sch...@linux-m68k.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 --- Comment #2 from Andreas Schwab --- compare_to_allowed_values doesn't set *num most of the time even when returning non-zero, especially if warn is true.

[Bug fortran/94769] Possible use of uninitialized variable num

2020-04-26 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94769 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- C