[Bug fortran/104321] Dead code since r12-4467-g64f9623765da33

2023-03-25 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104321

anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |FIXED
 CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
 Status|NEW |RESOLVED

--- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Fixed.

[Bug fortran/104321] Dead code since r12-4467-g64f9623765da33

2023-03-25 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104321

--- Comment #3 from CVS Commits  ---
The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf :

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b5fce899dbbd7246d003209b2fe3b04f8738

commit r13-6862-gb5fce899dbbd7246d003209b2fe3b04f8738
Author: Harald Anlauf 
Date:   Sat Mar 25 19:59:45 2023 +0100

Fortran: remove dead code [PR104321]

gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:

PR fortran/104321
* trans-decl.cc (gfc_conv_cfi_to_gfc): Remove dead code.

[Bug fortran/104321] Dead code since r12-4467-g64f9623765da33

2023-02-15 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104321

--- Comment #2 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #1)
> I think it is not only dead code but it should be also removed:
> 
> Glancing at the code, the 'data = NULL;' does not make sense (cf.
> 'memcpy(lhs, rhs)' above, lhs is data+offset) – and also does not match the
> comment.
> Besides, all testcases seem to be happy with that line being dead code

So we can just remove this dead code as obvious and finally close the PR?

[Bug fortran/104321] Dead code since r12-4467-g64f9623765da33

2022-02-01 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104321

--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus  ---
I think it is not only dead code but it should be also removed:

Glancing at the code, the 'data = NULL;' does not make sense (cf. 'memcpy(lhs,
rhs)' above, lhs is data+offset) – and also does not match the comment.
Besides, all testcases seem to be happy with that line being dead code

Thus, I think the following is the right solution:

diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc
index 6493cc2f6b1..45ba440c1db 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc
+++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc
@@ -7107,5 +7107,2 @@ gfc_conv_cfi_to_gfc (stmtblock_t *init, stmtblock_t
*finally,
   /* if (cond) { block2 }  */
-  tmp = fold_build2_loc (input_location, MODIFY_EXPR, void_type_node,
-data, fold_convert (TREE_TYPE (data),
-null_pointer_node));
   tmp = build3_v (COND_EXPR, cond_var, gfc_finish_block (),

[Bug fortran/104321] Dead code since r12-4467-g64f9623765da33

2022-02-01 Thread marxin at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs 
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104321

Martin Liška  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Last reconfirmed||2022-02-01
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever confirmed|0   |1