[Bug fortran/58469] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Defined assignment: ICE, possibly wrong value

2013-10-04 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58469

Tobias Burnus  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #5 from Tobias Burnus  ---
Close as FIXED.

The ICE is now solved on both the trunk (4.9) and the 4.8 branch. I filled
PR58620 to track the wrong-code issue.

[Bug fortran/58469] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Defined assignment: ICE, possibly wrong value

2013-10-04 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58469

--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus  ---
Author: burnus
Date: Fri Oct  4 16:25:55 2013
New Revision: 203207

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203207&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-10-04  Tobias Burnus  

Backport from mainline
2013-09-25  Tobias Burnus  

PR fortran/57697
PR fortran/58469
* resolve.c (generate_component_assignments): Avoid double free
at runtime and freeing a still-being used expr.


2013-10-04  Tobias Burnus  

Backport from mainline
2013-09-25  Tobias Burnus  

PR fortran/57697
PR fortran/58469
* gfortran.dg/defined_assignment_8.f90: New.
* gfortran.dg/defined_assignment_9.f90: New.


Added:
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/defined_assignment_10.f90
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/defined_assignment_11.f90
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/defined_assignment_8.f90
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/defined_assignment_9.f90
Modified:
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
branches/gcc-4_8-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog

[Bug fortran/58469] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Defined assignment: ICE, possibly wrong value

2013-09-25 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58469

--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus  ---
Author: burnus
Date: Wed Sep 25 19:54:12 2013
New Revision: 202922

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=202922&root=gcc&view=rev
Log:
2013-09-25  Tobias Burnus  

PR fortran/57697
PR fortran/58469
* resolve.c (generate_component_assignments): Avoid double free
at runtime and freeing a still-being used expr.

2013-09-25  Tobias Burnus  

PR fortran/57697
PR fortran/58469
* gfortran.dg/defined_assignment_8.f90: New.
* gfortran.dg/defined_assignment_9.f90: New.

Added:
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/defined_assignment_8.f90
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/defined_assignment_9.f90
Modified:
trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
trunk/gcc/fortran/resolve.c
trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog

[Bug fortran/58469] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Defined assignment: ICE, possibly wrong value

2013-09-18 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58469

--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus  ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #0)
> Additionally, I wonder what the code should print - 20 or 42. With the
> current code (plus patch) and with crayftn it prints 20. (ifort and pgf95
> segfault.) I have the vague feeling that 42 is correct

Correction: I meant that gfortran(+comment 0 patch) and crayftn print 42 -
while I (wrongly?) expect that the defined assignment gets invoked, leading to
the value 20.

[Bug fortran/58469] [4.8/4.9 Regression] Defined assignment: ICE, possibly wrong value

2013-09-18 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58469

Tobias Burnus  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Known to work||4.7.3
   Target Milestone|--- |4.8.2
Summary|Defined assignment: ICE,|[4.8/4.9 Regression]
   |possible wrong value|Defined assignment: ICE,
   ||possibly wrong value
  Known to fail||4.8.1, 4.9.0

--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus  ---
As defined assignment (for components with intrinsic assignment) is new since
4.8, previously working code fails. Hence, I marked it as 4.8/4.9 regression.