Hi Mikael,

Am 04.03.23 um 23:29 schrieb Mikael Morin:
> Le 04/03/2023 à 22:20, Harald Anlauf a écrit :
>> Hi Mikael,
>>
>> Am 04.03.23 um 18:09 schrieb Mikael Morin:
>>> There was a comment about the old_symbol thing at the end of my previous
>>> message:
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-March/613354.html
>>
>> I think Tobias might be the better person to answer this.
>> But when playing with variations of that else-branch,
>> I always hit an issue with class_74.f90, where the class
>> variables are not dummy arguments but local variables.
>>
>> E.g. take the following reduced testcase:
>>
>> subroutine foo
>>    class(*)  :: y
>>    dimension :: y(:,:)
>>    pointer   :: y
>> end subroutine foo
>>
>> So when we see the dimension but haven't seen the
>> pointer (or allocatable) declaration, we appear to
>> generate an error with bad consequences (ICE).
>>
>> If this is a resolution issue, maybe it can be fixed
>> differently, but likely needs digging deeper.  With
>> the patch as-is at least I do not see a memory leak
>> in that context.
>>
> One of my suggestions was to fix it as attached.
> It is probably more clear with an actual patch to look at.
> It seems to work on your example and class_74 as well.

This fix is great.  I've included it in the revised patch.

> It seems to also fix some valgrind errors on this example:
>     subroutine foo
>       pointer   :: y
>       dimension :: y(:,:)
>       class(*)  :: y
>     end subroutine foo
> I'm fine with that fix if it works for you.

I've added this variant to class_74.f90, so it won't break
without noticing.

> I suggest waiting for next stage 1, but it's your call, you have the
> green light from Steve anyway.

I've chosen to push patch v3 (attached) after a further round of
regtesting as r13-6497-g6aa1f40a326374 .

> Thanks for your work.

Many thanks for your very helpful review!

Harald