--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-24 09:28 ---
Subject: Bug 43843
Author: pault
Date: Sat Apr 24 09:28:32 2010
New Revision: 158683
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158683
Log:
2010-04-24 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/43841
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-24 09:28 ---
Subject: Bug 43841
Author: pault
Date: Sat Apr 24 09:28:32 2010
New Revision: 158683
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158683
Log:
2010-04-24 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/43841
--- Comment #28 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-24 12:29 ---
Subject: Bug 43227
Author: pault
Date: Sat Apr 24 12:29:23 2010
New Revision: 158687
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158687
Log:
2010-04-24 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-24 12:29 ---
Subject: Bug 43266
Author: pault
Date: Sat Apr 24 12:29:23 2010
New Revision: 158687
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=158687
Log:
2010-04-24 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #29 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-24 12:30 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.5.
Thanks, as ever, Dominique!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #20 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-25 16:27 ---
(In reply to comment #19)
Janus,
When I got up this morning, I made a start on documenting the fortran-dev
version of gfc_find_derived_vtab with a view to understand the code flow and to
understand why the original
--- Comment #37 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-26 10:57 ---
I think that we can mark this as closed.
Thanks, first to Salvatore for the report and second to Janus for the fix.
Salvatore, to repeat Janus's request, could you please check that there are no
further regres
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-21 21:05
---
Fixed in mainline.
Waiting to commit to 4.0
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22010
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-07-14 15:21
---
Patch committed to mainline and 4.0
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW
--
Bug 19292 depends on bug 16435, which changed state.
Bug 16435 Summary: gfortran X edit descriptor failure: test f77-edit-x-out.f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16435
What|Old Value |New Value
---
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05 05:36
---
I think that 4.0 opened and closed more than once since I promised to complete
this!
Fixed on mainline and 4.02
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05 05:47
---
> I am a little busy, but I might be able to try some more.
> However, I have no real experience programming compilers,
> and I don't think I understand the
Join the club!
> inte
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-05 06:08
---
This is amusing.
integer o(4), b, c
COMMON /IBM/ o
EQUIVALENCE (o(1),b),(C,o(4))
o(3)=1
CALL MYSUB1
CALL MYSUB2
END
subroutine MYSUB1
integer o
us: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23270
: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23308
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-13 09:31
---
(In reply to comment #0)
Edmund,
>
> professional. Is there a workaround or is this a bug which must be fixed?
>
>
Thomas beat you to it!
In the mean time, the following works:
pro
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-14 12:40
---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Confirmed.
This is really pr15966, although this latter has been marked as being resolved.
Feng Wang's patch allowed arrays to be used as internal units when there is no
--- Additional Comments From pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-14 19:30
---
Fixed on mainline and 4.02
There's just the documentation to do, now.
Paul T
--
What|Removed |
E on correct code
Product: gcc
Version: 4.0.2
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
CC: gcc-bu
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-19 13:25 ---
Martien,
Thank you very much for this report.
I have assigned it to myself and have a non-regtested fix:
As remarked by Janus, the problem is with the array argument. The code
produced for the proc_pointer call is
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-20 04:59 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
Janus,
That version is a very good suggestion - thanks. I am set up to apply the
patch, so, although component procedure pointers is one of your
specialisations, I can efficiently get on
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-20 06:43 ---
Subject: Bug 42104
Author: pault
Date: Fri Nov 20 06:43:13 2009
New Revision: 154358
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154358
Log:
2009-11-20 Paul Thomas
Janus Weil
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-11-20 07:57 ---
Many thanks for the report.
Fixed on trunk
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 05:33 ---
Subject: Bug 42104
Author: pault
Date: Thu Dec 3 05:32:58 2009
New Revision: 154935
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154935
Log:
2009-12-03 Paul Thomas
Janus Weil
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 05:33 ---
Subject: Bug 41829
Author: pault
Date: Thu Dec 3 05:32:58 2009
New Revision: 154935
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=154935
Log:
2009-12-03 Paul Thomas
Janus Weil
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 21:28 ---
The smaller testcase of comment #1 is fixed with
Index: gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c
===
--- gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c(revision 154935)
+++ gcc/fortran
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-03 21:46 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> The original fails because the vtable cannot be found. This is due to:
> use grid_module, only : grid
This is true of trunk:
/usr/lib/../lib64/crt1.o: In function `_start':
--- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-06 13:32 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> However, I fail to see why. Paul, do you have an idea?
>
I have loaded fortran-dev and this PR onto my laptop - I'm on the road again
this week.
I'll see if I have a
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-14 05:20 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> Paul what is the status of this PR? I see a commit as last comment. Is this
> fixed? Is something missing?
>
>From everything that I can see, it is fixed. Thanks for the rem
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 05:41 ---
Confirmed.
This is where it comes from:
Index: gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
===
*** gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c(revision 155192)
--- gcc/fortran/trans
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 20:17 ---
I think that FX was right, since Toon has not responded in 6 months.
Entering a WONTFIX
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 20:51 ---
I believe that gfortran behaves correctly in all the testcases in this thread.
I have written to Bob Corbet to see if he agrees. The nub of the matter is
that a local declaration always has precedence over a host
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 20:54 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> With the upcoming release of 4.5, I think it would be nice to fix/improve the
> translation related bugs now, i.e. this, PR38573 and PR40489.
>
> As I have no idea how to rep
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 21:02 ---
Hmmm! :-)
Since Cray pointers are non-standard, one might argue for undetermined
behaviour. However, logically, both pointer and pointee are symbols in the
modules and so should be use associated.
Therefore, I vote
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-17 21:04 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
Gentlemen,
What is the word on this? A WONTFIX?
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39654
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-18 05:27 ---
I bumped this up to "accepts-invalid" to make it a bit more prominent. It is
even a correct designation because the "RHS too many items" is manifestly
invalid.
Cheers
Paul
--
pault at
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-18 06:47 ---
This fixes it and even bootstraps and regtests:
Index: gcc/fortran/interface.c
===
--- gcc/fortran/interface.c (revision 155192)
+++ gcc/fortran
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-18 14:30 ---
What shall we do with this, gents?
A WONTFIX?
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40165
--- Comment #19 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-18 14:32 ---
Can this now be closed or has it transmogrified itself into something else?
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40168
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-18 14:35 ---
Joost,
The "name" of the error message is clearly marked by the '1'. I frankly do not
see any need to spend time on this one, so I am marking it as a WONTFIX.
If you want to revive it at ano
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #14 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-18 14:42 ---
Hi guys!
Do you want to suspend this PR or to junk it?
Let's get it out of the unconfirmed list.
Thanks
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40318
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-18 14:45 ---
Hmmm! What shall we do with this?
IMHO we should issue a WONTFIX.
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40319
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-18 14:48 ---
I cannot see any point in retaining this PR against the gfortran target.
I am marking it, especially in light of Rainer's remarks, as WONTFIX.
Cheers
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org ch
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-18 14:53 ---
What do you want to do with this, Tobias?
Confirmed
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-19 17:58 ---
This is going to be big trouble to fix.
I do not know how we can easily distinguish between two symbols with the same
name and different flavours.
Maybe derived types should not be in the symtree but in one of their
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-19 18:02 ---
Goran,
What you say is manifestly so. However, as a native English speaker I have no
need of translation. Have CC'd Tobias in the hope that it is as irritating to
a German as a Swede :-)
Thanks for the r
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-20 18:47 ---
Confirmed
I will post a somewhat simpler patch, once it has regtested if it does :-)
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-20 21:58 ---
Created an attachment (id=19355)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19355&action=view)
A fix for the PR
The attached bootstraps and regtests. Will fix PR41117 at the same time.
Paul
--
p
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-12-29 18:09 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
I believe that this code is doubly invalid:
(i) You cannot have an automatic array in the main program; and
(ii) An automatic array cannot have an initialization expression.
Both g95 and
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-07 14:49 ---
I had better add this to the list!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-08 05:47 ---
type(t) function func2() result(res)
type t
sequence
integer :: i = 5
end type t
res%i = 2
end function func2
causes a segmentation fault!
Confirmed
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed
--- Comment #19 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-11 06:14 ---
Created an attachment (id=19535)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=19535&action=view)
Fix and testcase for the PR
This will be submitted to the list tonight after checking tha
--- Comment #21 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-11 12:50 ---
(In reply to comment #20)
> The patch in comment #19, passes all my tests, but (otherwise you'ld be
> disappointed;-) compiling the reduced test in comment #8 gives a "Segmentation
> fault"
--- Comment #26 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-11 18:23 ---
(In reply to comment #25)
> I have applied the patch in comment #19 to a clean fortran-exp and I still see
> the segmentation fault when compiling the test in comment #8.
>
A that's becau
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-12 13:29 ---
We have replaced an "accepts invalid" with a "rejects valid". If we do not fix
this in time for 4.5.0 release, I suggest we revert the fix for PR36497.
I am CC'ing Janus. Maybe he will see
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-13 22:16 ---
I am just about to post a fix.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 06:13 ---
Subject: Bug 42481
Author: pault
Date: Thu Jan 14 06:13:19 2010
New Revision: 155876
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155876
Log:
2010-01-14 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #27 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 06:17 ---
Subject: Bug 41478
Author: pault
Date: Thu Jan 14 06:17:38 2010
New Revision: 155877
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=155877
Log:
2010-01-14 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 06:19 ---
Fixed on trunk.
Thanks for the report
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #28 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-14 06:20 ---
Fixed on trunk.
Thanks for the report
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-18 09:54 ---
This PR has me somewhat flummoxed. I have changed the title to reflect the
fact that it does not matter if the component is allocatable or a pointer.
Also, a component reference of an allocatable array of derived
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-18 17:31 ---
Confirmed.
A weird and wonderful feature of this bug is that it disappears for -O2 and
higher :-)
The problem comes about because fsym->backend_decl is being used, which is
incorrect if the argument is miss
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-18 17:32 ---
Have posted a fix on the list today.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-18 19:55 ---
Index: gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c
===
*** gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c(revision 155875)
--- gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c(working copy
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-19 06:04 ---
Ah, I was being stupid; now I see what test case 2 actually is. duuh, I did
not think to go to comment #10!
My patch that was just posted does indeed fix this, so I'll take it on.
Thanks for the report.
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-19 19:47 ---
Subject: Bug 42783
Author: pault
Date: Tue Jan 19 19:46:59 2010
New Revision: 156046
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156046
Log:
2010-01-19 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-19 19:47 ---
Subject: Bug 42772
Author: pault
Date: Tue Jan 19 19:46:59 2010
New Revision: 156046
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156046
Log:
2010-01-19 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-19 19:48 ---
Fixed on trunk.
Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-19 19:49 ---
I believe that the commit in comment #7 fixes it. If not, please get in touch.
Thanks for the report
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-21 20:39 ---
Subject: Bug 42736
Author: pault
Date: Thu Jan 21 20:38:51 2010
New Revision: 156161
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156161
Log:
2010-01-21 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-21 20:45 ---
Fixed on trunk.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-23 12:13 ---
I have just posted a patch for this.
Cheers
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-24 17:00 ---
Subject: Bug 41167
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jan 24 16:59:51 2010
New Revision: 156197
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156197
Log:
2010-01-24 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/41044
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-24 17:00 ---
Subject: Bug 41044
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jan 24 16:59:51 2010
New Revision: 156197
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156197
Log:
2010-01-24 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/41044
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-25 07:53 ---
I just posted the patch for this, so could take it with some advantage. Will
correct 4.4 in a few days.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #14 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-27 20:06 ---
Subject: Bug 42736
Author: pault
Date: Wed Jan 27 20:06:08 2010
New Revision: 156302
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156302
Log:
2010-01-27 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #15 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-27 20:07 ---
2 down, 1 to go.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-28 20:35 ---
trunk and 4.4 have diverged too far from 4.3 to fix this one simply. The patch
applied cleanly but the problem was not fixed. Copying over the entirity of
gfc_conv_elemental_dependencies, with mods for other
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-30 18:22 ---
I just, at last, posted a fix on the list.
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38324
--- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-30 21:13 ---
Subject: Bug 41044
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jan 30 21:12:59 2010
New Revision: 156389
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156389
Log:
2010-01-30 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/41044
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-30 21:13 ---
Subject: Bug 41167
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jan 30 21:12:59 2010
New Revision: 156389
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156389
Log:
2010-01-30 Paul Thomas
PR fortran/41044
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-30 21:13 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.4.
Thanks for the report
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #14 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-30 21:14 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.4.
Thanks for the report
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-31 12:05 ---
Subject: Bug 38324
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jan 31 12:05:22 2010
New Revision: 156399
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156399
Log:
2010-01-31 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-31 14:57 ---
Subject: Bug 38324
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jan 31 14:57:13 2010
New Revision: 156401
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156401
Log:
2010-01-31 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-31 15:00 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.4
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42913
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-01-31 20:40 ---
I think that I know how to fix this one, so am assigning myself. I would
regard this as a "serious" bug.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-02 05:17 ---
I am not at all happy with designating this bug a regression. This worked with
4.1 and 4.2 because the stride measure for the derived type was the same as an
integer; add more components and see what happens
I
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-05 05:28 ---
Subject: Bug 42309
Author: pault
Date: Fri Feb 5 05:28:37 2010
New Revision: 156512
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156512
Log:
2010-02-05 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-05 05:36 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Why there is a negative check? Well, I do not know. I also can speculate about
> a poor man's overflow check, which sometimes indeed works, but often fails.
I suspect that yo
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-05 16:28 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Subject: Re: ICE segfault when reading module file
>
> Tobias,
>
> I'll give it some thought at lunchtime.
I did give it some thought but got interrupted in writing m
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-06 19:44 ---
Subject: Bug 42309
Author: pault
Date: Sat Feb 6 19:44:41 2010
New Revision: 156554
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=156554
Log:
2010-02-06 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-02-06 19:45 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.4.
Many thanks for the report!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-16 04:39 ---
PR closed. Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #21 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-07-16 04:49 ---
I tried to fix 4.3 but failed to find an easy way of overcoming problems with
4.3. Since this bug has been present for 10 years without being reported, I
feel quite relaxed about leaving 4.3 as it is.
Fixed on 4.4
2101 - 2200 of 3045 matches
Mail list logo
