https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86277
--- Comment #27 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #25)
> (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #24)
> > (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #23)
> > >
> > > This regresses on pr108065.f90 (that's a few extra analyzer warnings),
> > > and on pr69955.f90 (that's one extra __builtin_malloc).
> >
> > This removes the regressions. Not fully retested again.
> >
> Comment #23 is probably the more correct one.
> Comment #24 works because of the double temporary. Even if the first
> temporary has NULL data component, the second one uses malloc
> unconditionally to set data, and the argument is seen as present.
Are you sure that you haven't mixed up those two?
When trying with my extended testcase, and looking at the tree dump,
I see a double temporary for the call
call i ([real:: y])
where the data pointer to the first allocation is clobbered later.
So I would rather go with the version from comment #24.
The said line is actually very old code ... ;-)
If you don't object, I'll package the patch with testcases and submit.
