[Bug fortran/103287] [12 Regression] ICE in argument_rank_mismatch, at fortran/interface.c:2240
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103287 --- Comment #9 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- *** Bug 100025 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/103287] [12 Regression] ICE in argument_rank_mismatch, at fortran/interface.c:2240
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103287 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jrfsousa at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #8 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- *** Bug 100024 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
[Bug fortran/103287] [12 Regression] ICE in argument_rank_mismatch, at fortran/interface.c:2240
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103287 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #7 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- Should be fixed now.
[Bug fortran/103287] [12 Regression] ICE in argument_rank_mismatch, at fortran/interface.c:2240
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103287 --- Comment #6 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:8e2771069ed0c157cca825d6af5792e94c4407c1 commit r12-6322-g8e2771069ed0c157cca825d6af5792e94c4407c1 Author: Sandra Loosemore Date: Wed Jan 5 13:18:10 2022 -0800 Fortran: Fix ICE in argument_rank_mismatch [PR103287] This patch removes an incorrect assertion. A user-friendly error for this case is already given elsewhere. 2022-01-05 Steve Kargl Sandra Loosemore PR fortran/103287 gcc/fortran/ * interface.c (argument_rank_mismatch): Replace incorrect assertion with return. gcc/testsuite/ * gfortran.dg/c-interop/pr103287-1.f90: new. * gfortran.dg/c-interop/pr103287-2.f90: new.
[Bug fortran/103287] [12 Regression] ICE in argument_rank_mismatch, at fortran/interface.c:2240
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103287 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to sandra from comment #4) > The proposed fix in comment 2 looks OK to me, although I'd like to see a > comment here like > > "This case corresponds to an assumed-rank actual passed to a function > without an explicit interface, which is diagnosed in gfc_procedure_use." > > to explain what is going on. I no longer commit patches. Feel free to do whatever you want here; although, I think the comment is unwarranted.
[Bug fortran/103287] [12 Regression] ICE in argument_rank_mismatch, at fortran/interface.c:2240
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103287 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- The proposed fix in comment 2 looks OK to me, although I'd like to see a comment here like "This case corresponds to an assumed-rank actual passed to a function without an explicit interface, which is diagnosed in gfc_procedure_use." to explain what is going on.
[Bug fortran/103287] [12 Regression] ICE in argument_rank_mismatch, at fortran/interface.c:2240
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103287 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org, ||sandra at codesourcery dot com --- Comment #3 from Martin Liška --- Started with r12-3827-g7a40f2e74815a926, it was rejected before the revision.
[Bug fortran/103287] [12 Regression] ICE in argument_rank_mismatch, at fortran/interface.c:2240
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103287 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0
[Bug fortran/103287] [12 Regression] ICE in argument_rank_mismatch, at fortran/interface.c:2240
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103287 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P4
[Bug fortran/103287] [12 Regression] ICE in argument_rank_mismatch, at fortran/interface.c:2240
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103287
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2021-11-16
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Change an assert to an if-statement and simply return.
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/interface.c b/gcc/fortran/interface.c
index 30c99ef3938..8bd507be67c 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/interface.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/interface.c
@@ -2237,7 +2237,9 @@ argument_rank_mismatch (const char *name, locus *where,
}
else
{
- gcc_assert (rank2 != -1);
+ if (rank2 == -1)
+ return;
+
if (rank1 == 0)
gfc_error_opt (0, "Rank mismatch between actual argument at %L "
"and actual argument at %L (scalar and rank-%d)",
[Bug fortran/103287] [12 Regression] ICE in argument_rank_mismatch, at fortran/interface.c:2240
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103287 G. Steinmetz changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code --- Comment #1 from G. Steinmetz --- It should be added that following variant started with r10, between 20190908 and 20190915 : $ cat z2.f90 subroutine g call s(1) end subroutine h(x) integer, pointer :: x(..) call s(x) end
