https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69368
alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|INVALID |FIXED
--- Comment #27 from alalaw01 at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #25)
> (In reply to alalaw01 from comment #23)
> > Well, this one is not fixed by -fno-aggressive-loop-optimizations.
>
> No, that just disabled one symptom of the issue at that point in time.
> Fixing the issue also fixes this occurance (well, I hope so ;))
So by "fixing the issue" - we mean, making --std=legacy prevent this (as
although against the SPEC, colleagues with more FORTRAN knowledge than I
suggest this is common)? SPEC seem to be saying they will not change the
source: https://www.spec.org/cpu2006/Docs/faq.html#Run.05
As Jakub suggested in comment #13:
> So, perhaps we want some flag on the Fortran COMMON decls that would be set
> on > COMMON that ends with an array and would tell get_ref_base_and_extent
> (and
> other spots?) that accesses can be beyond end of the decl?
but only if --std=legacy ? ? ?
Should I raise a new bug for this, as both this and 53068 are CLOSED?
