--- Comment #8 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-09 20:31
---
Subject: Bug 30720
Author: fxcoudert
Date: Fri Feb 9 20:31:18 2007
New Revision: 121773
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=121773
Log:
PR fortran/30720
* trans-array.c (gfc_t
--- Comment #7 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-07 20:49 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> The patch I attached removes this argument, and it gives no regression on the
> testsuite. I also simplified the conditional expression by using a COND_EXPR
> instead of generating differe
--- Comment #6 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-07 19:10
---
(In reply to comment #5)
> If you find something that works without that argument (which is
> a bit of a kudge), so much the better.
The patch I attached removes this argument, and it gives no regression on the
t
--- Comment #5 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-07 17:52 ---
Hi FX,
> do you remember why always performing that check (ie, turn function to be
> always true) is not the right thing to do?
When working on this, I hit numerous testsuite regressions
when always checking for n
--- Comment #4 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-06 23:16
---
Created an attachment (id=13018)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=13018&action=view)
Patch for this bug
Here's the patch I propose. It makes the code simpler by using a cond_expr
instead of usi
--- Comment #3 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-06 23:13
---
To keep things separate, I filed PR30723 for the missed optimization.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-06 21:00
---
The wrong-code bug happens in gfc_trans_create_temp_array. For some reason, the
function argument to that function is false, and the code present to take care
of negative extent is not triggered. Thomas, you're th
--- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-06 20:34
---
Confirming this bug (both of them, actually).
For the missed-optimization, I think there's no reason to keep a library
function _gfortran_internal_free(x) that is equivalent to "if(x) free(x);", we
should generat
