[Bug fortran/68054] ICE on using protected attribute in program without program statement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68054 --- Comment #3 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Thu Oct 29 20:32:41 2015 New Revision: 229558 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229558=gcc=rev Log: 2015-10-24 Steven G. KarglPR fortran/68054 * decl.c (match_attr_spec): PROTECTED can only be a module. 2015-10-24 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/68054 * gfortran.dg/pr68054.f90: New test. Added: branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr68054.f90 Modified: branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/fortran/decl.c branches/gcc-5-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug fortran/68054] ICE on using protected attribute in program without program statement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68054 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |5.3 --- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Fixed on trunk and 5-branch.
[Bug fortran/68054] ICE on using protected attribute in program without program statement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68054 --- Comment #2 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: kargl Date: Thu Oct 29 17:23:52 2015 New Revision: 229542 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=229542=gcc=rev Log: 2015-10-29 Steven G. KarglPR fortran/68054 * decl.c (match_attr_spec): PROTECTED can only be a module. 2015-10-29 Steven G. Kargl PR fortran/68054 * gfortran.dg/pr68054.f90: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr68054.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/decl.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug fortran/68054] ICE on using protected attribute in program without program statement
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68054 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2015-10-24 CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |kargl at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- I have a patch