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?