[Bug fortran/94289] Assumed-rank array bounds resuscitate on the second call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94289 sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #6 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org --- This is working now. I've committed a slightly cleaned-up version of the testcase (basically just exchanging the print "FAIL!"s with STOPs). I also convinced myself that the testcase is correct. ;-)
[Bug fortran/94289] Assumed-rank array bounds resuscitate on the second call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94289 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:c31d2d14f798dc7ca9cc078200d37113749ec3bd commit r12-4629-gc31d2d14f798dc7ca9cc078200d37113749ec3bd Author: Sandra Loosemore Date: Fri Oct 22 11:08:19 2021 -0700 Add testcase for PR fortran/94289 2021-10-22 José Rui Faustino de Sousa Sandra Loosemore gcc/testsuite/ PR fortran/94289 * gfortran.dg/PR94289.f90: New.
[Bug fortran/94289] Assumed-rank array bounds resuscitate on the second call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94289 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 --- I'm still seeing failures on mainline head, specifically these 3 groups: Testing pointer array Using assumed-rank array: lbound: expected: [ 1 1 1] got: [ 3 5 9] FAIL! ubound: expected: [ 2 46 3] got: [ 4 50 11] FAIL! Testing allocatable array Using assumed-rank array: lbound: expected: [ 1 1 1] got: [ 3 5 9] FAIL! ubound: expected: [ 2 46 3] got: [ 4 50 11] FAIL! Testing explicit array Using assumed-rank array: lbound: expected: [ 1 1 1] got: [ 3 5 9] FAIL! ubound: expected: [ 2 46 3] got: [ 4 50 11] FAIL! I'm also confused about the validity of the expectations. :-S
[Bug fortran/94289] Assumed-rank array bounds resuscitate on the second call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94289 Tobias Burnus changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus --- I find the testcase confusing – but I think it works now correctly on mainline (GCC 11), thanks to the fix for PR99043 (committed to both GCC 11 and GCC 10) and possibly some other prior fixes. Namely: - if the dummy argument is a pointer/allocatable, it has the same bounds as the dummy argument - if is is nonallocatable nonpointer, the lower bounds are [1, 1, 1]. Can you check? (GCC 10 or GCC 11) Can you also check whether your PR95196 is fixed with mainline (GCC 11)?
[Bug fortran/94289] Assumed-rank array bounds resuscitate on the second call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94289 Dominique d'Humieres changed: What|Removed |Added Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2020-07-08 --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres --- Confirmed from at least GG7. Note that I didn't check the validity of the expectations.
[Bug fortran/94289] Assumed-rank array bounds resuscitate on the second call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94289 --- Comment #1 from José Rui Faustino de Sousa --- Hi all! My first comment is not very clear so to elaborate a bit. For assumed-rank arrays no temporary array descriptor with the correct bounds is created like it is for assumed-shape arrays. So although the array bounds are correctly reported by the lbound, ubound and shape intrinsics the underlying array descriptor is still the original one. And since it is the original array descriptor, not a temporary with correct array bounds, that is passed down the call chain subsequent procedures will get a descriptor with the wrong bounds. This will probably imply adding assumed-rank arrays to the deferred initialization list, which is already done (I guess accidentally) for bind(c) procedures. I guess by removing the condition on the first if clause in gfc_build_dummy_array_decl and, hopefully, then in the "type_of_array" switch in gfc_trans_deferred_vars. This will imply also solving PR93957. Best regards, José Rui
