[Bug fortran/50073] gfortran must not accept function name when result name is present

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50073 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid

[Bug fortran/50073] gfortran must not accept function name when result name is present

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50073 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed

[Bug fortran/50073] gfortran must not accept function name when result name is present

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50073 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-14 09:37:28 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Sun Aug 14 09:37:25 2011 New Revision: 177745 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177745 Log: 2011-08-14 Janus Weil PR

[Bug fortran/50073] gfortran must not accept function name when result name is present

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50073 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/50070] Segmentation fault at size_binop_loc in fold-const.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50070 --- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-14 12:02:57 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > The relevant quote from the F08 std is probably: > > "C417 (R422) A type-param-value in a char-length shall be a colon, a

[Bug fortran/50070] Segmentation fault at size_binop_loc in fold-const.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50070 --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-14 12:07:55 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > ifort rejects the original test case with: > > error #6756: A COMMON block data object must not be an automatic object. [Z] >

[Bug fortran/50070] Segmentation fault at size_binop_loc in fold-const.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50070 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed

[Bug fortran/50070] Segmentation fault at size_binop_loc in fold-const.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50070 --- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-15 09:15:36 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Based on chapter 7.1.11, I would say that g95's error message is wrong: z does > not have to have constant length. Well, to be precise

[Bug fortran/50070] Segmentation fault at size_binop_loc in fold-const.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50070 --- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-15 09:49:44 UTC --- Btw, for a related test case ... subroutine sub common n,z integer z(n) end ... gfortran spits out: integer z(n) 1 Error: Variable 'n' at (

[Bug fortran/49961] [OOP] type-bound function can not return a pointer of a array

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49961 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/50070] Segmentation fault at size_binop_loc in fold-const.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50070 --- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-16 09:19:07 UTC --- Here is a patch which rejects the test case with a different error message than comment #6: Index: gcc/fortran/resolve.c

[Bug fortran/49962] [OOP] ICE when using type-bound function returning vector

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed

[Bug fortran/42051] [OOP] ICE on array-valued function with CLASS formal argument

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42051 --- Comment #27 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-16 21:22:36 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Tue Aug 16 21:22:31 2011 New Revision: 177800 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177800 Log: 2011-08-16 Paul Thomas

[Bug fortran/49962] [OOP] ICE when using type-bound function returning vector

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962 --- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-16 21:22:36 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Tue Aug 16 21:22:31 2011 New Revision: 177800 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177800 Log: 2011-08-16 Paul Thomas PR

[Bug fortran/43896] [OOP] ICE in gfc_conv_variable, at fortran/trans-expr.c:551

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43896 --- Comment #22 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-16 21:22:36 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Tue Aug 16 21:22:31 2011 New Revision: 177800 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177800 Log: 2011-08-16 Paul Thomas

[Bug fortran/49962] [OOP] ICE when using type-bound function returning vector

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49962 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/50070] Segmentation fault at size_binop_loc in fold-const.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50070 --- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-17 09:14:24 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Wed Aug 17 09:14:18 2011 New Revision: 177825 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177825 Log: 2011-08-17 Janus Weil PR

[Bug fortran/50070] Segmentation fault at size_binop_loc in fold-const.c

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50070 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/49638] [OOP] length parameter is ignored when overriding type bound character functions with constant length.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49638 --- Comment #20 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-20 19:11:59 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Sat Aug 20 19:11:56 2011 New Revision: 177932 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=177932 Log: 2011-08-20 Janus Weil PR

[Bug fortran/49638] [OOP] length parameter is ignored when overriding type bound character functions with constant length.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49638 --- Comment #21 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-20 19:30:44 UTC --- (In reply to comment #19) > ToDo: For many cases one only gets a warning instead of an error right now. r177932 turns some warnings into errors.

[Bug fortran/49638] [OOP] length parameter is ignored when overriding type bound character functions with constant length.

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49638 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/50050] Internal compiler error free_expr0 at expr.c:3709 via gfc_done_2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50050 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/50174] [4.7 Regression] ICE on derived type allocation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50174 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/50174] [4.7 Regression] ICE on derived type allocation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50174 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-24 11:36:35 UTC --- Probably related to PR 50050.

[Bug fortran/50174] [4.7 Regression] ICE on derived type allocation

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50174 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-24 14:36:22 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > Probably related to PR 50050. Apparently it is fixed by Mikael's patch at http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2011-08/msg00199.html

[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE on valid with allocatable class component

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |UNCONFIRMED CC

[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE on valid with allocatable class component

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 --- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-29 16:26:39 UTC --- (In reply to comment #3) > (r171654?). Rather not. This one only concerns type-bound procedures (of which Andrew's test case has none): http://gcc.gnu.org/view

[Bug fortran/50225] [OOP] The allocation status for polymorphic allocatable variables is not set properly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50225 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed

[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code

[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0

[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 --- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-29 18:29:16 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) > > > (r171654?). > > > > Rather not. This one only concerns type-bound procedures (of which Andrew's > > test case

[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 --- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-29 19:28:42 UTC --- Well, the obvious patch (based on Tobias' debugging) would be: Index: gcc/fortran/trans-types.c === --

[Bug fortran/50231] Fatal Error: Wrong module version '5' (expected '4') for file 'sizes.mod'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50231 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED CC

[Bug fortran/50231] Fatal Error: Wrong module version '5' (expected '4') for file 'sizes.mod'

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50231 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|NEW Last reconfirmed

[Bug fortran/50225] [OOP] The allocation status for polymorphic allocatable function results is not set properly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50225 --- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-29 21:55:16 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Mon Aug 29 21:55:10 2011 New Revision: 178262 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=178262 Log: 2011-08-29 Janus Weil PR

[Bug fortran/50225] [OOP] The allocation status for polymorphic allocatable function results is not set properly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50225 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/50227] [4.7 Regression] [OOP] ICE-on-valid with allocatable class variable

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50227 --- Comment #12 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-08-30 17:09:22 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) > And indeed it seems to fix the segfault. ... and regtests cleanly. Unfortunately, there is one more complication: When compiling the two fi

[Bug fortran/45828] [4.6 Regression] No default initialization of derived type members?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45828 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo

[Bug fortran/45828] [4.6 Regression] No default initialization of derived type members?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45828 --- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-30 19:23:11 UTC --- (In reply to comment #5) > To fix it I propose the following patch (not regtested yet): Regtesting showed that the patch in comment #5 fails on common_10.f90 (due to

[Bug fortran/45828] [4.6 Regression] No default initialization of derived type members?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45828 --- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-30 19:36:48 UTC --- (In reply to comment #6) > Here is a better patch, which avoids the use of > 'gfc_has_default_initializer': Forgot to mention: This one regtests cleanly

[Bug fortran/45828] [4.6 Regression] No default initialization of derived type members?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45828 --- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-30 19:54:11 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Thu Sep 30 19:54:08 2010 New Revision: 164765 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164765 Log: 2010-09-30 Janus Weil PR

[Bug fortran/45828] [4.6 Regression] No default initialization of derived type members?

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45828 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/45746] [OOP] ICE in fold_convert_loc: pointer to allocatable array with select type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45746 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-09-30 21:01:13 UTC --- I do not see the error on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu at r164767. Can anyone confirm that?

[Bug fortran/45848] [OOP] ICE on invalid code in fortran/symbol.c:2410

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45848 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code

[Bug fortran/45836] [OOP] Fortran 2003 - Type Bound Procedure Error - Type Mismatch

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45836 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed

[Bug fortran/45748] [4.5/4.6 Regression] -fimplicit-none failures when using intrinsic MAX

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45748 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC

[Bug fortran/45748] [4.5/4.6 Regression] -fimplicit-none failures when using intrinsic MAX

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45748 --- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-02 10:38:45 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Sat Oct 2 10:38:42 2010 New Revision: 164901 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=164901 Log: 2010-10-02 Janus Weil PR

[Bug fortran/45794] [4.6 Regression] ICE: Segmentation fault in gfc_conv_procedure_call

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45794 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-02 11:57:49 UTC --- I think this regression is due to r153793, which was Tobias' fix for PR41850. The reason for the ICE is that the formal argument "mask" of "_gfortran_mm

[Bug fortran/45740] PROCEDURE POINTER and PROTECTED: Accepts/ICEs on invalid code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45740 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed

[Bug fortran/45740] PROCEDURE POINTER and PROTECTED: Accepts/ICEs on invalid code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45740 --- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-02 14:19:18 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > Note: The problem not only applies to procedure pointers, but also to data > pointers, as the following example shows: Well, at least this e

[Bug fortran/45746] [OOP] ICE in fold_convert_loc: pointer to allocatable array with select type

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45746 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/45740] PROCEDURE POINTER and PROTECTED: Accepts/ICEs on invalid code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45740 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution

[Bug fortran/45740] PROCEDURE POINTER and PROTECTED: Accepts/ICEs on invalid code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45740 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED AssignedTo

[Bug fortran/45740] PROCEDURE POINTER and PROTECTED: Accepts/ICEs on invalid code

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45740 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/45900] [OOP] Static TBP resolved incorrectly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45900 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||wrong-code Status

[Bug fortran/45900] [OOP] Static TBP resolved incorrectly

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45900 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-05 21:42:15 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > Confirmed. This is basically a duplicate of PR45836. Both are also related to PR42769. I'm currently not sure how to fix this. The

[Bug fortran/45933] [4.6 regression] [OOP] ICE in gfc_add_component_ref, at fortran/class.c:77

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45933 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-valid-code

[Bug fortran/45933] [4.6 regression] [OOP] ICE in gfc_add_component_ref, at fortran/class.c:77

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45933 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo

[Bug fortran/45933] [4.6 regression] [OOP] ICE in gfc_add_component_ref, at fortran/class.c:77

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45933 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-07 17:35:23 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Thu Oct 7 17:35:18 2010 New Revision: 165126 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165126 Log: 2010-10-07 Janus Weil PR

[Bug fortran/45933] [4.6 regression] [OOP] ICE in gfc_add_component_ref, at fortran/class.c:77

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45933 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/43018] alloc_comp_scalar_1.f90: Valgrind Invalid read of size 8

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43018 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed

[Bug fortran/43018] alloc_comp_scalar_1.f90: Valgrind Invalid read of size 8

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43018 --- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-07 21:07:07 UTC --- It seems the "invalid read" is due to the call to PACK. It still appear when commenting out lines 15 & 16, but not any more when commenting out 14, 15 & 16.

[Bug fortran/45748] [4.5/4.6 Regression] -fimplicit-none failures when using intrinsic MAX

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45748 --- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-09 13:41:16 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Sat Oct 9 13:41:12 2010 New Revision: 165223 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165223 Log: 2010-10-09 Janus Weil PR

[Bug fortran/45748] [4.5/4.6 Regression] -fimplicit-none failures when using intrinsic MAX

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45748 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/45961] New: [4.6 Regression] [OOP] Problem with polymorphic type-bound operators

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45961 Summary: [4.6 Regression] [OOP] Problem with polymorphic type-bound operators Product: gcc Version: 4.6.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3

[Bug fortran/45961] [4.6 Regression] [OOP] Problem with polymorphic type-bound operators

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45961 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid

[Bug fortran/45961] [4.6 Regression] [OOP] Problem with polymorphic type-bound operators

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45961 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-10 18:17:09 UTC --- (In reply to comment #2) > The patch in comment #1 fixes the pr without regression. Note that the test in > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-10/msg00104.html gives

[Bug fortran/45961] [4.6 Regression] [OOP] Problem with polymorphic type-bound operators

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45961 --- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-10 21:35:13 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Sun Oct 10 21:35:10 2010 New Revision: 165263 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165263 Log: 2010-10-10 Janus Weil PR

[Bug fortran/45961] [4.6 Regression] [OOP] Problem with polymorphic type-bound operators

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45961 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/46060] gfortran crash when referencing procedure pointer

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46060 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code

[Bug fortran/46060] [F03] procedure pointer component referenced without argument list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46060 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|gfortran crash when |[F03] procedure pointer

[Bug fortran/46067] hang or spurious compiler message using procedure pointer with pass

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46067 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/46067] [F03] invalid procedure pointer assignment not detected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46067 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||accepts-invalid

[Bug fortran/46060] [F03] procedure pointer component referenced without argument list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46060 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo

[Bug fortran/46067] [F03] invalid procedure pointer assignment not detected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46067 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-18 21:29:31 UTC --- (In reply to comment #1) > > potential problem 2: if the error message is correct and if the type of the > > passed-object dummy argument in the sample code is ch

[Bug fortran/46067] [F03] invalid procedure pointer assignment not detected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46067 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed

[Bug fortran/46067] [F03] invalid procedure pointer assignment not detected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46067 --- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-21 07:51:37 UTC --- Here is a variant of the test case in comment #3 which uses plain procedure pointers instead of PPCs (and avoids recursive I/O): implicit none type test_type

[Bug fortran/46067] [F03] invalid procedure pointer assignment not detected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46067 --- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-21 07:54:43 UTC --- And here is yet another variant, which uses a procedure as actual argument to another procedure (instead of procedure pointers). Same symptoms (accepts-invalid). module m

[Bug fortran/46067] [F03] invalid procedure pointer assignment not detected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46067 --- Comment #8 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-21 07:59:37 UTC --- Note: Both of the test cases in comment #6 and #7 are invalid but accepted by current trunk builds (as well as 4.5). However, they are rejected with the patch in comment #5

[Bug fortran/46067] [F03] invalid procedure pointer assignment not detected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46067 --- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-21 09:25:24 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Thu Oct 21 09:25:17 2010 New Revision: 165755 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165755 Log: 2010-10-21 Janus Weil PR

[Bug fortran/46067] [F03] invalid procedure pointer assignment not detected

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46067 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/46060] [F03] procedure pointer component referenced without argument list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46060 --- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-10-21 11:31:58 UTC --- Author: janus Date: Thu Oct 21 11:31:55 2010 New Revision: 165769 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=165769 Log: 2010-10-21 Janus Weil PR

[Bug fortran/46060] [F03] procedure pointer component referenced without argument list

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46060 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug fortran/45827] mio_component_ref(): Component not found when mixing f90 and f03 in large projects

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||janus at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/70350] [5 Regression] ICE with -fcheck=all and array initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70350 --- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Unfortunately this bug affects versions shipping with Debian and Ubuntu, e.g. gcc version 5.3.1 20160413 (Ubuntu 5.3.1-14ubuntu2) which is the version included in the lastest Ubuntu release 16.04

[Bug fortran/70350] [5 Regression] ICE with -fcheck=all and array initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70350 --- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Looks very related to PR 69385

[Bug testsuite/84094] New: several correctness issues in gfortran.dg

: testsuite Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: janus at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- see https://github.com/nncarlson/gfortran.dg/issues

[Bug preprocessor/84161] New: preprocessor should discard Fortran comments

: preprocessor Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: janus at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Consider this Fortran test case: #define _ASSERT_(a, b) if (.not. (a)) print *, b program preproc_test ! _ASSERT_() is a nice macro :) end Putting this

[Bug preprocessor/84161] preprocessor should discard Fortran comments

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84161 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #1) > It should not. Well, why not? If you say that the preprocessor is meant only for C/C++, then it shouldn't be used with Fortran at all. If

[Bug fortran/84273] New: Reject allocatable passed-object dummy argument (proc_ptr_47.f90)

Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: janus at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- implementing C453 (F03), C456 (F08), C461(F15) see https://github.com/nncarlson/gfortran.dg/issues/4

[Bug fortran/84273] Reject allocatable passed-object dummy argument (proc_ptr_47.f90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84273 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed

[Bug fortran/84313] New: [F08] reject procedure pointers in COMMON blocks

: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: janus at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- Procedure pointers in COMMON blocks are allowed per F03:R558, but forbidden per F08:C5100. gfortran allows them at present (cf. PR 36592), so we need a check to reject them

[Bug fortran/84273] Reject allocatable passed-object dummy argument (proc_ptr_47.f90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84273 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: janus Date: Mon Feb 12 17:11:58 2018 New Revision: 257590 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257590&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-02-12 Janus Weil PR fortr

[Bug fortran/84273] [F03] Reject allocatable passed-object dummy argument (proc_ptr_47.f90)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84273 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug testsuite/84094] several correctness issues in gfortran.dg

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84094 Bug 84094 depends on bug 84273, which changed state. Bug 84273 Summary: [F03] Reject allocatable passed-object dummy argument (proc_ptr_47.f90) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84273 What|Removed |A

[Bug fortran/84313] [F08] reject procedure pointers in COMMON blocks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84313 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed

[Bug fortran/84313] [F08] reject procedure pointers in COMMON blocks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84313 --- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: janus Date: Tue Feb 13 21:00:37 2018 New Revision: 257636 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=257636&root=gcc&view=rev Log: 2018-02-13 Janus Weil PR fortr

[Bug fortran/84313] [F08] reject procedure pointers in COMMON blocks

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84313 janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution

[Bug testsuite/84094] several correctness issues in gfortran.dg

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84094 Bug 84094 depends on bug 84313, which changed state. Bug 84313 Summary: [F08] reject procedure pointers in COMMON blocks https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84313 What|Removed |Added ---

[Bug fortran/84381] New: replace non-std 'call abort' by 'stop 1' in gfortran testsuite

Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: fortran Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: janus at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- A lot of the runtime tests in gfortran.dg use the non-std intrinsic subroutine ABORT to generate a test failur

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   >