[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-10-05 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |10.4

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-10-05 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #18 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dea2e6c7b5af2ec620fd94d824f006440907a34d commit r10-10170-gdea2e6c7b5af2ec620fd94d824f006440907a34d Author: Harald

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-10-05 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #17 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4aabb9ac284fea307aa70bb8ae4bdce298461bc7 commit r10-10169-g4aabb9ac284fea307aa70bb8ae4bdce298461bc7 Author: Harald

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-10-03 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #16 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:a3abacbaebc5583885600840cf2d968341be0275 commit r11-9065-ga3abacbaebc5583885600840cf2d968341be0275 Author: Harald Anlauf

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-10-03 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #15 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:082b3588ee01399b93fe73acd2ac181ec2ee3536 commit r11-9064-g082b3588ee01399b93fe73acd2ac181ec2ee3536 Author: Harald Anlauf

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-30 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #14 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:b19bbfb1482505367dd19ae4ab1ea19e36802b6a commit r12-3993-gb19bbfb1482505367dd19ae4ab1ea19e36802b6a Author: Harald Anlauf Date:

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-29 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #13 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Corrected patch that addresses the remaining issue (for valid code): https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-September/056599.html

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-27 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #12 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to anlauf from comment #9) A tentative patch which fixes the remaining issue is posted here: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-September/056584.html in the hope to learn

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-24 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #11 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Harald Anlauf : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:84cccff60a978174271a30042bf7841d2ae436eb commit r12-3884-g84cccff60a978174271a30042bf7841d2ae436eb Author: Harald Anlauf Date:

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-23 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #10 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Submitted: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/2021-September/056571.html

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-23 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |anlauf at gcc dot

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-22 Thread sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl --- On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 09:17:18PM +, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 > > anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: > >What|Removed

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-22 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #51497|0 |1 is obsolete|

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-22 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #6 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 51497 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51497=edit Patch Thanks for the research, Steve. The attached patch fixes the PR by excluding the listed functions.

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-22 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #5 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #3) > (In reply to anlauf from comment #2) > > I think the problem is we consider command_argument_count() as a pure > > function, > > so that gfc_is_constant_expr

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-22 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 --- Comment #4 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to kargl from comment #3) > Well, it is a pure function. Fortran 2018, page 327, > > All standard intrinsic functions are pure. Of course you are correct. I wanted to express

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-22 Thread kargl at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-22 Thread anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug fortran/102458] ICE tree check: expected array_type, have pointer_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6136

2021-09-22 Thread gscfq--- via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102458 G. Steinmetz changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||ice-on-invalid-code --- Comment #1 from