https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
--- Comment #12 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Sandra Loosemore :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1af78e731feb9327a17c99ebaa19a4cca1125caf
commit r12-4591-g1af78e731feb9327a17c99ebaa19a4cca1125caf
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Dat
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
--- Comment #11 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
There are still some bugs present with class arrays. E.g., this test case
ICEs:
module m
type :: t
integer :: id
real :: xyz(3)
end type
contains
subroutine testit2p(a)
class
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
--- Comment #10 from CVS Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Tobias Burnus :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:00f6de9c69119594f7dad3bd525937c94c8200d0
commit r12-3897-g00f6de9c69119594f7dad3bd525937c94c8200d0
Author: Tobias Burnus
Date: M
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
--- Comment #9 from Tobias Burnus ---
I think my patch for moving the CFI<->GFC conversion to FE-generated code
partially helps,
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-September/578904.html
However, I still see the following issues:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |sandra at gcc dot
gnu.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sandra at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
--- Comment #6 from Tobias Burnus ---
Some bound issues were fixed with PR99043 – but my bet is that the BIND(C)
issues still exist. (→ testcase (C + Fortran) attached to this PR).
* * *
Additionally: PR 94020 (duplicate of this PR) with attac
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
Dominique d'Humieres changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed||2020-07-21
Priority|P3
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
--- Comment #4 from Tobias Burnus ---
José's PR (which came earlier then mine, hmm) has also an extensive test case
in
attachment 47960 for assumed-size arrays.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
--- Comment #3 from Tobias Burnus ---
*** Bug 94020 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus ---
(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #0)
> Testing shows that assumed-rank arrays are mishandled in several ways
Additionally, with assumed-size arrays passed to assumed-rank dummies:
both size(x) and siz
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94070
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus ---
Created attachment 47988
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=47988&action=edit
… with assumed_rank_19.f90
14 matches
Mail list logo
