This is not bug 5035.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug2]$ cat bb.f90
subroutine SetupRadii(N)
integer,intent(in)::N
integer::i,j
write(*,*)(/(i,i=1,N)/)
write(*,*)(/(j,j=1,5)/)
end subroutine SetupRadii
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug2]$ gfortran -Wall -O1 -v -c bb.f90
Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: ./configure --disable-multilib --enable-languages=fortran
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.0 20070228 (prerelease)
/usr/local/libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.2.0/f951 bb.f90 -quiet
-dumpbase bb.f90 -mtune=generic -auxbase bb -O1 -Wall -version -I
/usr/local/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.2.0/finclude -o /tmp/cc30FF7z.s
GNU F95 version 4.2.0 20070228 (prerelease) (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
compiled by GNU C version 4.2.0 20070228 (prerelease).
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=89 --param ggc-min-heapsize=112046
bb.f90: In function setupradii:
bb.f90:5: warning: i is used uninitialized in this function
as --traditional-format -V -Qy -o bb.o /tmp/cc30FF7z.s
GNU assembler version 2.17 (x86_64-linux-gnu) using BFD version 2.17 Debian
GNU/Linux
For those that missed it:
bb.f90: In function setupradii:
bb.f90:5: warning: i is used uninitialized in this function
It seems that whatever generates this warning is not fully aware of implied do
constructs. Note that no warning is generated for j, for which the bounds are
known at compile time. The warning is still generated when N is a local
variable rather than an argument.
I haven't tried with gcc younger than my two month old build.
--
Summary: False warning for variable used in 'automatic' implied
do loop
Product: gcc
Version: 4.2.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
ReportedBy: terry at chem dot gu dot se
GCC host triplet: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31731
