http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #26 from Paul Thomas 2010-11-21 07:18:04
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> The test program is:
snip
> type (particle_struct), optional, target :: p(:)
> real, pointer, optional :: axis(:)
>
> axis => p%r%vec(1)
>
> end s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #25 from Dominique d'Humieres
2010-11-19 21:46:56 UTC ---
> Well, in theory, I believe it should work with Paul's patch.
> Of course, theory and experience are two different beast. :)
When Paul will have commit his final patch, it wi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #24 from Steve Kargl
2010-11-19 21:32:38 UTC ---
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 09:04:42PM +, dominiq at lps dot ens.fr wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
>
> --- Comment #22 from Dominique d'Humieres
> 2010-11
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #23 from david.sagan at gmail dot com 2010-11-19 21:24:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #22)
> > > Is there something invalid here?
> >
> > Yes. You need to allocate ptr unless you have
> > pault's [re-]allocate on assignment patch.
>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #22 from Dominique d'Humieres
2010-11-19 21:04:22 UTC ---
> > Is there something invalid here?
>
> Yes. You need to allocate ptr unless you have
> pault's [re-]allocate on assignment patch.
Even with Paul's patch it does not work.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #20 from david.sagan at gmail dot com 2010-11-19 20:46:36 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Is there something invalid here?
> ptr = myA%i%j
Yes this is not correct. This line should be:
ptr => myA%i%j
If you use "gfortran -fch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #19 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-19
17:42:12 UTC ---
Another test case to think about. Ifort compiles but gives:
ptr =
myA%i%j = 1 2 3 4
gfortran compiles and gives:
$ ./a.out
Segm
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #18 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com 2010-11-16 15:04:39 UTC ---
Dear Tobias,
> If my understanding is correct, we can either try to extend the 'span' hack to
> make it work for more cases - or we defer it to the array descr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #17 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-16
08:18:12 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> ipn->offset = -1;
> span.9 = 8;
>
> I think we want ipn->span = 8;
While I am sure that we want to have ipn->span, I am not sure we can. My
understan
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #16 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-16
07:42:34 UTC ---
dump shows:
ipn->dtype = 265;
ipn->dim[0].lbound = 1;
ipn->dim[0].ubound = 4;
ipn->dim[0].stride = 1;
ipn->data = (void *) &sorb->i[0].j;
ipn->offset = -1;
span.9 = 8;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #15 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-16
06:42:08 UTC ---
With a slight modification to the patch in Comment #10, gfortran now gives:
@@ -1041,7 +1041,7 @@
tree
gfc_get_symbol_decl (gfc_symbol * sym)
{
- tree decl;
+ tree decl = NULL;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #14 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-16
05:42:26 UTC ---
With ifort:
$ ifort test2.f90
$ ./a.out
***
myA = 1 a 2 b 3 c 4 d
---
ipn%i%j = 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #13 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-16
03:45:17 UTC ---
Created attachment 22417
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22417
Test case example. what is the correct interpretation?
This attachment shows the point I am trying
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #12 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-16
02:14:06 UTC ---
The test case in http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=16885 I believe
is wrong.
The structure type(b) has two components, j and c, where c is a single
character not initiali
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #11 from Dominique d'Humieres
2010-11-15 10:14:16 UTC ---
The patch in comment #9 fixes this PR along with pr34640 (and its duplicates),
pr39304, pr40737, and pr41627 (probably also duplicates of pr34640) without
regression. The only
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-15
06:53:50 UTC ---
Created attachment 22395
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22395
An alternate patch that also works
This alternate patch also fixes the problem by initializing the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jvdelisle at gcc dot
|g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-15
06:43:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 22394
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22394
A sample runtime case
The sample runtime case. The pointer is set to the specified element of the
v
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-14
18:50:30 UTC ---
The code that sets the span is never reached. I am studying this to see if I
can sort it out. I think the problem is in trans_decl.c (gfc_get_symbol_decl).
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pault at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #5 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-14
17:56:30 UTC ---
After getting rid of the segfault, it is clear the runtime results are wrong.
It does look like the span is not getting set correctly. So I begin to look for
why it is not being set.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-13
19:01:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> This avoids the segfault. But what is lang_specific and why is it not set in
> problem case? Where does it normally get set?
lang_specific allows to attac
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
--- Comment #3 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-13
07:11:57 UTC ---
This avoids the segfault. But what is lang_specific and why is it not set in
problem case? Where does it normally get set?
Index: trans-expr.c
==
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46339
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
Status|UNCONFIRMED
26 matches
Mail list logo
