https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61173
--- Comment #7 from Keith Refson ---
Is it possible to say which version of gcc will contain the fix? It is not in
the "gfortran.com" snapshot dated 20140528. Will this go in to the 4.9.1
release?
Component: libfortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: krefson at gmail dot com
Created attachment 32933
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=32933&action=edit
Source for testcase
The attached file compiles bug gives erroneous results with
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61499
--- Comment #9 from Keith Refson ---
This fix checks out for the full code in context as well as the boiled-down
example. Happy for this to be closed.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61927
--- Comment #1 from Keith Refson ---
Created attachment 33193
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=33193&action=edit
Testcase for array comparison optimization bug
: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: krefson at gmail dot com
The attached code, which tests an allocatable array for nonzero values, works
correctly when compiled at -O1 and -O3, but malfunctions at -O3
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: krefson at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 51723
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51723&action=edit
Test program
The attached (correct)
: 14.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: krefson at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 6
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119800
--- Comment #3 from Keith Refson ---
I think it probably also needs to flag up if MOLD contains an allocatable or
pointer component too. Modifying the example to TRANSFER to an integer,
followed by a second TRANSFER with SOURCE= as an integer a
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119800
--- Comment #7 from Keith Refson ---
Yes, definitely. Any scalar with an ultimate allocatable component should be
warned about.