[Bug fortran/31683] bogus warnings with optional arguments

2007-06-20 Thread jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk
--- Comment #8 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-06-20 15:20 --- this really seems a duplicate of PR 31688, so I'll close this PR and reopen 31688. If one wants to get the error message mentioned in comment #6, I suggest to open a new PR. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate

[Bug fortran/31683] bogus warnings with optional arguments

2007-04-25 Thread burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #6 from burnus at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-25 19:49 --- Has anyone any objection if I change the purpose of this PR to: - gfortran should detect that the local variable ncoset is never allocated - as NAG f95 does: Error: foo.f90, line 45: ALLOCATABLE array NCOSET

[Bug fortran/31683] bogus warnings with optional arguments

2007-04-25 Thread jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk
--- Comment #7 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-04-26 05:54 --- (In reply to comment #6) Regarding the original problem with CP2k: A dependence on the optimization options usually indicates a middle-end problem rather than a (Fortran) front-end problem. As it occurred around the

[Bug fortran/31683] bogus warnings with optional arguments

2007-04-24 Thread tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org
--- Comment #4 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-24 21:06 --- There is a questionable practice with the original code: It uses pab without a check whether it is present. The compiler tries to guard against this, partially by generating (from the *.original dump): if (pab

[Bug fortran/31683] bogus warnings with optional arguments

2007-04-24 Thread jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk
--- Comment #5 from jv244 at cam dot ac dot uk 2007-04-25 02:18 --- (In reply to comment #4) This is a very misleading diagnostic, but not a wrong-code as far as I can see. Indeed, I was mislead by the diagnostic in reducing the wrong-code issue to the above testcase. So that leaves