From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf1-x132.google.com (mail-lf1-x132.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::132]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E49FA388A402; Sun, 23 May 2021 18:32:16 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org E49FA388A402 Received: by mail-lf1-x132.google.com with SMTP id v8so32347220lft.8; Sun, 23 May 2021 11:32:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kctaTE33u8TQFmxP2XbsNivB4XIReJS6VJuY1SjQxhg=; b=Ymn1D8ERbuxbW17VKp80SJWUtKEeyyH4BtNNETdWpdhG1hmGmwzVc5ceYPQAC3N82y Pj0YbYVAfTcCsejOjrOxNjaYicdvIzCWvho1jVrKJI7IpuDF/9G46WCMU41tQif2eB7B V+04oApHXKv7LPRu/sxYxX2K4lnpD8YHvqwYfZUUQHtoYdPrFOxRomvl5sqy7kkAskNL a8BUAnGS7n4bX+o1uwT79q11sEkRxgwovgZvRM67ujlTFhBkOB3T0ffZZrJoXeOe2qf6 ixGpAQ2wLT5rA9dv6MePWTO3j+OvndRMZagA9OalEuIWNi3OQT12Vd2taagt2TuA2QgP ryjg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5311PgN62hByTTPBXJLKkjUa+IhpdALNOB/Khm0rFsJGMsjRhr6R 04xqIKVaPH2e6TMZL2jSuQmMYX9rE6GtXKIdyHA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyjr89vrySCXr6EQOBlEeV5RebewWzLzSnpKhg+rXtW0v3lMFyu30uAK4zJpCIb2dP2+9yNjNtK3NSE0pnWoyw= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:a83:: with SMTP id m3mr8292093lfu.44.1621794735666; Sun, 23 May 2021 11:32:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Paul Richard Thomas Date: Sun, 23 May 2021 19:32:07 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] PR fortran/100551 - [11/12 Regression] Passing return value to class(*) dummy argument To: Harald Anlauf Cc: fortran , gcc-patches X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: fortran@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Fortran mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 May 2021 18:32:18 -0000 Hi Harald, I meant to deal with this myself since I am the guilty party. However, the last two weeks have been taken up by a house move and so gfortran has been on the backburner. The patch looks good and seems to do the job - OK for master and 11-branch. Thanks a million for dealing with it! Paul PS If I walk 200m I can now see the "dreaming spires" of Oxford! Better still, there are no fewer than three very good pub/restaurants within walking distance :-) On Thu, 20 May 2021 at 23:22, Harald Anlauf via Fortran wrote: > The fix for PR93924/5 has caused a regression for code such as given > in the present PR. This can be remedied by adjusting the check when > to invoke the implicit conversion of actual argument to an unlimited > polymorphic procedure argument. > > Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. > > OK for mainline and backport to 11-branch? > > Thanks, > Harald > > > Fortran: fix passing return value to class(*) dummy argument > > gcc/fortran/ChangeLog: > > PR fortran/100551 > * trans-expr.c (gfc_conv_procedure_call): Adjust check for > implicit conversion of actual argument to an unlimited polymorphic > procedure argument. > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > PR fortran/100551 > * gfortran.dg/pr100551.f90: New test. > > -- "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough" - Albert Einstein