--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-14 18:04 ---
Subject: Bug 38033
Author: pault
Date: Fri Nov 14 18:03:05 2008
New Revision: 141861
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141861
Log:
2008-10-14 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-14 18:39 ---
Fixed on trunk
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-14 19:00 ---
A fix is regtesting right now.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 05:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=16680)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16680&action=view)
A prototype patch
This fixes the problem but causes a couple of regressions - eg. mapping_1.f90
This
--- Comment #27 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 15:20 ---
As far as I can see, all the valid testcases work on trunk and 4.3 - should we
close this one?
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31610
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 15:53 ---
Created an attachment (id=16683)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16683&action=view)
A fix for the PR
Bootstraps and regtests on FC9/x86_i64
Paul
2008-11-15 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 17:27 ---
Subject: Bug 37926
Author: pault
Date: Sat Nov 15 17:26:13 2008
New Revision: 141890
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141890
Log:
2008-11-15 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #13 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-15 17:40 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> I filled PR38119 for that PR.
This is probably stupid but what is the difference between the two PRs?
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38095
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 12:02 ---
Subject: Bug 37926
Author: pault
Date: Sun Nov 16 12:00:44 2008
New Revision: 141914
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141914
Log:
2008-11-16 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 12:13 ---
Subject: Bug 38119
Author: pault
Date: Sun Nov 16 12:11:53 2008
New Revision: 141915
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141915
Log:
2008-11-16 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 12:16 ---
Fixed on trunk. Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #15 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 12:22 ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> (In reply to comment #13)
> > > I filled PR38119 for that PR.
> > This is probably stupid but what is the difference between the two PRs?
'twas stupid - I missed
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 12:16 ---
HJ - I just fixed this on trunk, I believe. Note that I used the old PR in the
ChangeLog, for which apologies.
Thanks for the quick report. I would appreciate confirmation that this really
did the job.
Best
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-16 22:25 ---
Thomas,
Since you are there, bar the shouting, I thought that I would assign you:-)
Cheers and thanks
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-18 10:01 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> this bug seems fixed in 4.4.0, should it be closed?
>
Joost,
I forgot the PR and missed your prompt - I'll apply it to 4.3 and close it.
Thanks
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.o
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-18 19:35 ---
Yes indeed - confirmed.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-18 19:57 ---
Joost,
Do you know of any compilers that catch this? As you say, it is not so easy to
fix.
BTW you say that this another case where an unneeded temp is created. I can
see your PRs after this. Which ones come
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-18 20:00 ---
Nice catch!
Thanks
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-18 20:09 ---
This produces the code:
s (struct array1_integer(kind=4) & b, integer(kind=4) & i, integer(kind=4) & j)
{
integer(kind=8) ubound.0;
integer(kind=8) stride.1;
integer(kind=8) offset.2;
integer(ki
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-18 20:11 ---
Another tough one, I think.
Thanks
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-18 20:26 ---
Ah, yes. The module name check only pertains to the module being read.
Instead, it should check that the equivalence members are from the same module
- this might itself be use associated into the module being read
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-19 03:26 ---
Subject: Bug 38119
Author: pault
Date: Wed Nov 19 03:25:00 2008
New Revision: 141990
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141990
Log:
2008-11-19 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-19 03:37 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> Subject: Bug 38119
>
> Author: pault
> Date: Wed Nov 19 03:25:00 2008
> New Revision: 141990
>
> URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-19 03:43 ---
Subject: Bug 38171
Author: pault
Date: Wed Nov 19 03:41:57 2008
New Revision: 141991
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141991
Log:
2008-11-19 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-19 03:47 ---
Subject: Bug 38171
Author: pault
Date: Wed Nov 19 03:46:12 2008
New Revision: 141992
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=141992
Log:
2008-11-19 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-19 03:49 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3.
Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-19 16:21 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I don't know if the code in comment #0 is valid or not, but if the file
> h5global.mod does not exist compiling it with gfortran r141995 gives:
>
> pr38171.f90:2.14:
&g
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-21 13:54 ---
I do not believe that it is a regression, so I have removed that from the
summary.
The profiling that you have done tells a story - I think that it is fairly
clear where the problem lies; not in making a spurious
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu |pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
|dot org
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-22 09:09 ---
Oddly,
type Path
type(Spline), allocatable :: r(:)
end type Path
compiles OK:-)
Given that the ICE is caused by
gcc_assert (GFC_DESCRIPTOR_TYPE_P (type))
it must be that the type(Spline) :: r(3), which
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-22 16:57 ---
Created an attachment (id=16749)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16749&action=view)
Provisional fix for PR
This is half way through regtesting - have to go to a movie, so will see
later:-
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-23 21:36 ---
Subject: Bug 37735
Author: pault
Date: Sun Nov 23 21:34:44 2008
New Revision: 142142
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142142
Log:
2008-11-23 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #15 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 06:35 ---
Subject: Bug 32795
Author: pault
Date: Mon Nov 24 06:34:16 2008
New Revision: 142148
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142148
Log:
2008-11-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #14 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 06:35 ---
Subject: Bug 34143
Author: pault
Date: Mon Nov 24 06:34:16 2008
New Revision: 142148
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142148
Log:
2008-11-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 06:35 ---
Subject: Bug 34820
Author: pault
Date: Mon Nov 24 06:34:16 2008
New Revision: 142148
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142148
Log:
2008-11-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #26 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 19:14 ---
Subject: Bug 35681
Author: pault
Date: Mon Nov 24 19:13:12 2008
New Revision: 142169
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142169
Log:
2008-11-24 Steven G. Kargl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 19:20 ---
Subject: Bug 37926
Author: pault
Date: Mon Nov 24 19:18:39 2008
New Revision: 142171
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142171
Log:
2008-11-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 19:20 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3.
Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 19:14 ---
Subject: Bug 37792
Author: pault
Date: Mon Nov 24 19:13:12 2008
New Revision: 142169
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142169
Log:
2008-11-24 Steven G. Kargl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #4 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 19:21 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3
Thanks for the report
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 21:37 ---
Subject: Bug 38033
Author: pault
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:36:05 2008
New Revision: 142174
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142174
Log:
2008-11-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 21:38 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3.
Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38033
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 21:51 ---
Subject: Bug 38119
Author: pault
Date: Mon Nov 24 21:50:06 2008
New Revision: 142175
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142175
Log:
2008-11-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-24 21:52 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3.
Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38119
--- Comment #3 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-26 17:22 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
I am on my travels right now and only have 4.4.0 20080624 on my laptop. The
testcase works fine with that, so this regression has crept in since then.
Cheers
Paul
--
http
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-27 22:21 ---
Subject: Bug 36526
Author: pault
Date: Thu Nov 27 22:20:27 2008
New Revision: 142248
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142248
Log:
2008-11-27 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-27 22:23 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3.
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 2008-11-28 14:31 ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> On i686-apple-darwin9, the testcase in comment #4 gives a "Bus error" at -m32
> (rev. 138886).
>
I'm going to look at this one over this weekend - the bus
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-28 14:32 ---
I might as well take it too:-)
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-29 17:52 ---
Subject: Bug 37735
Author: pault
Date: Sat Nov 29 17:51:03 2008
New Revision: 142282
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142282
Log:
2008-11-29 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-29 17:54 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3.
Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #16 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-29 20:43 ---
Subject: Bug 34143
Author: pault
Date: Sat Nov 29 20:42:22 2008
New Revision: 142284
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142284
Log:
2008-11-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #17 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-29 20:43 ---
Subject: Bug 32795
Author: pault
Date: Sat Nov 29 20:42:22 2008
New Revision: 142284
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142284
Log:
2008-11-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-29 20:43 ---
Subject: Bug 34820
Author: pault
Date: Sat Nov 29 20:42:22 2008
New Revision: 142284
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142284
Log:
2008-11-24 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
Paul
--
Summary: Memory leaks in allocatable component expressions
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: pault at gcc dot gnu d
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #18 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-29 21:56 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3.
Thanks for the report!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #11 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-30 07:42 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3
Thanks for the report
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38324
--- Comment #17 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-30 07:50 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3.
Comment #13 has migrated to PR38324.
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 2008-11-30 08:04 ---
This is fixed for trunk and 4.3.
I have prepared a testcase that will be committed tonight.
Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-30 08:50 ---
Subject: Bug 35824
Author: pault
Date: Sun Nov 30 08:48:51 2008
New Revision: 142292
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142292
Log:
2008-11-30 Paul Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Comment #10 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-30 13:13 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> I might as well take it too:-)
Since I cannot reproduce the bug, even at -m32, I am unassigning myself.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Remo
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-11-30 19:53 ---
Index: libgfortran/generated/reshape_r4.c
===
--- libgfortran/generated/reshape_r4.c (revision 142291)
+++ libgfortran/generated/reshape_r4.c (working
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-03 05:52 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Did you get the expected result also?
>
I couldn't tell - I did not have the 32 bit library installed. I'll try to fix
that.
Cheers
Paul
--
http://gcc.
--- Comment #16 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 09:38 ---
Hah! My VMware Fedora catches the bug and demonstrates that my simple fix of
comment #5 does the job; ie. unconditionally do the constant fold to a
gfc_charlen_type_node. This can never do any harm!
I will fix it
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 10:52 ---
Tobias,
It's a bit tough to call it a regression, since the earlier versions of
gfortran produced wrong code.
Is this worth fixing for 4.4? If we get the array descriptor business sorted
out, it should go
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-11 11:21 ---
This cures the ICE and allows correct code within the subroutine. 'span' is
not transferred in the call and so wrong code is produced if the pointer is
subsequently used in the caller.
I can apply it i
--- Comment #19 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-14 16:01 ---
Subject: Bug 35937
Author: pault
Date: Sun Dec 14 16:00:25 2008
New Revision: 142750
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142750
Log:
2008-12-14 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #20 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-14 16:09 ---
Subject: Bug 35937
Author: pault
Date: Sun Dec 14 16:07:46 2008
New Revision: 142751
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=142751
Log:
2008-12-14 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #21 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-14 16:11 ---
Fixed on trunk and 4.3.
Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-17 12:20 ---
This is, of course, confirmed!
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-18 09:13 ---
I am most of the way onto a solution for this so I'll assign myself.
The source of the problem is highlighted by two tests:
s/call foo(func("_"//bar()))/call foo(func(bar()))/
works fine as does a mo
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-18 16:35 ---
Created an attachment (id=16928)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16928&action=view)
Provisional patch for the PR
Testcase follows in next attachement.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/b
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-18 16:38 ---
Created an attachment (id=16929)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16929&action=view)
testcase for the PR
This might have departed somewhat from the original but it does at least work
with th
--- Comment #19 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-18 22:29 ---
I have noticed that the scalar TRANSFER does not respect the undefined
condition for the rest of the result if the SOURCE size is less than the MOLD
size. I have a patch for this, which is probably not complete but
--- Comment #12 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-19 23:59 ---
Created an attachment (id=16949)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16949&action=view)
a not quite patch for the PR
I'm down to one regression now - the last test of char_length_7.f90
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-22 19:39 ---
Created an attachment (id=16969)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16969&action=view)
patch for the PR
This is a patch that I cannot commit until January 3rd at the earliest. Please
could
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-22 20:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=16970)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16970&action=view)
The real patch for the PR without the extra bits:-)
Have eliminated the extra bits on the patch - sorr
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-22 21:55 ---
All routes to deal with this are way too invasive for this stage in the
proceedings. This PR must wait for the array descriptor upgrade, so I am
suspending it for now.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #17 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-23 09:26 ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > Patch committed, fixed on trunk, 4.4
> I think it was the wrong PR number (35780 instead of PR34820).
>
Dang it! Sorry about that, I used the
--- Comment #15 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-24 17:08 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
Dear Dominique,
> print *, len(string)
> print *, size(transfer(string,"xy",len(string)))
> yields a wrong code: the executable gives
>
>
us: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: rejects-valid
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=38657
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-12-31 10:47 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Created an attachment (id=17016)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=17016&action=view) [edit]
> fix
>
> Does anyone know the use of the block variab
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-03 14:15 ---
I have just posted a patch on the list.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-03 17:48 ---
Subject: Bug 38594
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jan 3 17:47:20 2009
New Revision: 143032
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143032
Log:
2009-01-03 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-03 22:58 ---
Fixed on trunk. 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 2009-01-03 23:01 ---
Mikael,
> Now the solutions:
> (1) Add some conditions to the if before to prevent executing this.
> (2) Remove the gfc_match_whatever that has nothing to do in resolve.c and
> find
> a better way
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-04 17:59 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> > In the mean time, I know how to apply a fix along the lines of 1.
> Ok, then; go for (1). I have nothing to propose.
I have just realised that the matching can be eliminated, a
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-04 23:17 ---
Subject: Bug 38665
Author: pault
Date: Sun Jan 4 23:17:37 2009
New Revision: 143064
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143064
Log:
2009-01-05 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #6 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-05 16:32 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> Assuming no local problems and a clean tree (looks like), the following commit
> might have caused the regression:
>
> r130257 | fxcoudert | 2007-11-17 14:46:53 +0100 (Sat,
--- Comment #7 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-05 17:35 ---
I'm just about to post a patch.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |
--- Comment #8 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-05 19:46 ---
Subject: Bug 38657
Author: pault
Date: Mon Jan 5 19:46:06 2009
New Revision: 143090
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143090
Log:
2009-01-05 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
--- Comment #9 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-05 19:47 ---
Trunk done, 4.3 to come!
Thanks for the report.
Paul
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-07 13:12 ---
(In reply to comment #0)
The lack of simplification is due to an omission in
target-memory.c(gfc_target_memory_size), in which the possibility of (1) a
constant cl->length and (ii) no defined character length, as h
ct: gcc
Version: 4.4.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: pault at gcc dot gnu dot org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_
--
pault at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
Last
--- Comment #2 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-08 16:42 ---
Steve,
gfc_target_encode_expr has no means to deal with EXPR_NULL. It's quite easy to
change that, so I have assigned myself.
Thanks for the report. "Yet another" don't be so hard! Maki
--- Comment #5 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-08 22:48 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> It was meant in jest. I'll change the summary to something
> more pleasing.
I know:-)
> BTW, James claims that some other failures occur, but I
> can't reproduce
--- Comment #1 from pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-01-10 00:11 ---
Subject: Bug 38765
Author: pault
Date: Sat Jan 10 00:11:18 2009
New Revision: 143237
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=143237
Log:
2009-01-10 Paul Thomas
PR fortr
301 - 400 of 3045 matches
Mail list logo
