[Bug fortran/80610] Compiler crashes ungraciously when large static array is initialized with anything other than zero

2017-05-30 Thread gustavo.hime at mpimet dot mpg.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80610 --- Comment #17 from Gustavo Hime --- (In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #12) Dear Jerry, Thank you for the feedback. For the record, I didn't say gfortran is crap, nor did I throw insults at it. At least I didn't mean to. Sorry if you

[Bug middle-end/80701] Option for generating link symbol for functions removed by DCE

2017-05-30 Thread gustavo.hime at mpimet dot mpg.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80701 --- Comment #6 from Gustavo Hime --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #5) Dear Thomas, Thank you for the feedback. Please keep in mind this can easily arise in a shared codebase, sometimes unintentionally. As Dominique pointed out, a

[Bug fortran/80610] Compiler crashes ungraciously when large static array is initialized with anything other than zero

2017-05-19 Thread gustavo.hime at mpimet dot mpg.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80610 --- Comment #8 from Gustavo Hime --- > > I understand the issue. It isn't a problem with gfortran. > You do not understand the issue, which I made quite clear when reporting the bug. The code compiles, links and runs if no non-zero option

[Bug fortran/80610] Compiler crashes ungraciously when large static array is initialized with anything other than zero

2017-05-19 Thread gustavo.hime at mpimet dot mpg.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80610 Gustavo Hime changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|INVALID

[Bug fortran/80701] gfortran ignores dead code after return statement

2017-05-10 Thread gustavo.hime at mpimet dot mpg.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80701 --- Comment #4 from Gustavo Hime --- Regarding this as a duplicate: on the one hand, it seems to be the same issue. Whether the (any) warning is on by default or not is something that will always be disputable, but the main issue is getting the

[Bug fortran/80701] gfortran ignores dead code after return statement

2017-05-10 Thread gustavo.hime at mpimet dot mpg.de
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80701 --- Comment #2 from Gustavo Hime --- --- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres --- > The compiler does generate a warning about the implicit interface if > -Wimplicit-interface is turned on explicitly. I would suggest this should > be on by

[Bug fortran/80701] New: gfortran ignores dead code after return statement

2017-05-10 Thread gustavo.hime at mpimet dot mpg.de
: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: gustavo.hime at mpimet dot mpg.de Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 41336 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41336=edit bug.f90 Compiling the attached code with "gfortran -c

[Bug fortran/80610] New: Compiler crashes ungraciously when large static array is initialized with anything other than zero

2017-05-03 Thread gustavo.hime at mpimet dot mpg.de
Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: gustavo.hime at mpimet dot mpg.de Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 41304 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41304=e

[Bug fortran/80555] New: gfortran crashes with segmentation fault

2017-04-28 Thread gustavo.hime at mpimet dot mpg.de
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: gustavo.hime at mpimet dot mpg.de Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 41282 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=41282=edit Run gfortran -c on this. gfortran crashes with segmentation fault when compil