https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60500
Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mikael at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #2) > possibly the L.1 label is misplaced? At least the result would crash if > malloc returned NULL. > Mmh, yes; it seems L.1 should come after the (default-)initialization of the just allocated array. There is nothing that can be done inside gfc_trans_allocate, because initialization comes from a frontend-generated statement after the allocate statement (introduced at revision r164305).