[Bug fortran/18271] ICE with computed array declaration

[Bug fortran/18271] ICE with computed array declaration

[manfred99 at gmx dot ch]

------- Comment #5 from manfred99 at gmx dot ch  2005-11-04 15:32 -------

1) There is an easy way to circumvent the ICE: 
if you add an explicit type conversion for IMAX, such as in
      REAL:: AUX1(25000+INT(0.82*float(IMAX)))
the ICE goes away and gfortran compiles it successfully and 
without warnings, even with "-std=f95".



2) WRT invalid code:
I checked the code with the Lahey Source Check, ifort, SUN f95 and g95:

--> Lahey/Fujitsu Fortran 95 (lf95): no errors, no warnings

--> Lahey Fortran 90 (lf90): error at INT expression
Line 5, file SOURCE.F90
      REAL:: AUX1(25000+INT(0.82*IMAX))
                        |
FATAL -- Specification expression required.


--> Intel ifort 8.1: no errors, no warnings with "-warn all -stand f90"

--> SUN Workshop f95 6.2: no errors, no warnings with "-w4"

--> g95: no errors, no warnings with "-std=f95"


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271

[Bug fortran/18271] ICE with computed array declaration

[anlauf at gmx dot de]

------- Comment #6 from anlauf at gmx dot de  2005-11-04 15:56 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> This is invalid code, INT is not allowed in a specification expression.

I'm not a language lawyer, but if I read it correctly, then
INT is a standard intrinsic function and thus allowed in a
restricted expression (F2003 draft standard, 7.1.6, R729, C710 (8))
Am I missing something?


-- 

anlauf at gmx dot de changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |anlauf at gmx dot de


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271

[Bug fortran/18271] ICE with computed array declaration

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #7 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-01-09 22:31 -------
we no longer ICE on this code but we still accept it.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|ice-on-invalid-code         |accepts-invalid


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271

[Bug fortran/18271] ICE with computed array declaration

[fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #8 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-07 16:27 -------
(In reply to comment #6)
> I'm not a language lawyer, but if I read it correctly, then
> INT is a standard intrinsic function and thus allowed in a
> restricted expression (F2003 draft standard, 7.1.6, R729, C710 (8))
> Am I missing something?

I've just sent a question to comp.lang.fortran. We'll see what the experts have
to say.


-- 

fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot
                   |                            |org


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271

[Bug fortran/18271] INT is allowed in a specification expression

[fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #9 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-08 09:22 -------
It appears that the original testcase, involving INT in as specification
expression, is valid F95 and F2003. It was not valid F90, however, because the
return type of INT is real. This is confirmed by the results of different
compilers and Bob Corbett on c.l.f, so I'm closing this one as INVALID.


-- 

fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
           Keywords|accepts-invalid             |
         Resolution|                            |INVALID
            Summary|ICE with computed array     |INT is allowed in a
                   |declaration                 |specification expression


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271

[Bug fortran/18271] INT is allowed in a specification expression

[anlauf at gmx dot de]

------- Comment #10 from anlauf at gmx dot de  2006-05-08 09:46 -------
(In reply to comment #9)
> It appears that the original testcase, involving INT in as specification
> expression, is valid F95 and F2003. It was not valid F90, however, because the
> return type of INT is real. This is confirmed by the results of different
> compilers and Bob Corbett on c.l.f, so I'm closing this one as INVALID.

FX,

I do not understand why you are closing this one as INVALID,
since you just argued that it VALID F95 and F2003.
Anyway, current gfortran seems to accept this code, so this
issue appears resolved.
Please do not break it! ;-)


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271

[Bug fortran/18271] INT is allowed in a specification expression

[fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #11 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-08 09:57 -------
(In reply to comment #10)
> I do not understand why you are closing this one as INVALID,
> since you just argued that it VALID F95 and F2003.

I'm saying that the bug report, which says "This illegal code is wrongly
accepted by gfortran", is INVALID, because the code is indeed legal.

> Please do not break it! ;-)

I'll be adding this bit of code to the testsuite.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271

[Bug fortran/18271] INT is allowed in a specification expression

[fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #12 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-08 09:59 -------
Subject: Bug 18271

Author: fxcoudert
Date: Mon May  8 09:59:09 2006
New Revision: 113627

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113627
Log:
        PR libfortran/18271
        * gfortran.dg/spec_expr_3.f90: New test.

Added:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/spec_expr_3.f90
Modified:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271

[Bug fortran/18271] INT is allowed in a specification expression

[fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #13 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-05-08 10:03 -------
Subject: Bug 18271

Author: fxcoudert
Date: Mon May  8 10:03:11 2006
New Revision: 113628

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=113628
Log:
        PR libfortran/18271
        * gfortran.dg/spec_expr_3.f90: New test.

Added:
    branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/spec_expr_3.f90
      - copied unchanged from r113627,
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/spec_expr_3.f90
Modified:
    branches/gcc-4_1-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271

[Bug fortran/18271] ICE with computed array declaration

[manfred99 at gmx dot ch]

------- Additional Comments From manfred99 at gmx dot ch  2004-12-12 21:01 -------
Subject: Re:  ICE with computed array declaration

This example is from the software copygb
(ftp://ftpprd.ncep.noaa.gov/pub/cpc/wd51we/copygb) which was ported
from generic Fortran95 to g95,
and thus compiles perfectly with g95, but not with gfortran.

> 
> ------- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-12-09
> 00:22 -------
> This is invalid code, INT is not allowed in a specification expression.
> 
> -- 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>            Keywords|ice-on-valid-code           |ice-on-invalid-code
> 
> 
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271
> 
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
> 



-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271

[Bug fortran/18271] ICE with computed array declaration

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-12-09 00:47 -------
The problem is that we insert a function call to convert IMAX to default real,
and check_inquiry does not support these conversion functions.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271

[Bug fortran/18271] ICE with computed array declaration

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-12-09 00:22 -------
This is invalid code, INT is not allowed in a specification expression.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|ice-on-valid-code           |ice-on-invalid-code


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271

[Bug fortran/18271] ICE with computed array declaration

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2004-11-02 13:37 -------
Confirmed, here is the backtrace:
#0  0x000169f4 in check_inquiry (e=0x42103d20) at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/expr.c:
1334
#1  0x00017038 in check_restricted (e=0x5a7aa4) at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/expr.c:
1593
#2  0x00017038 in check_restricted (e=0x5a7aa4) at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/expr.c:
1593
#3  0x000167d8 in check_intrinsic_op (e=0x5a7aa4, check_function=0x4459d8 
<error_message+11340>) at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/expr.c:1236
#4  0x00016f64 in check_restricted (e=0x5a7aa4) at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/expr.c:
1616
#5  0x000170c4 in restricted_args (a=0x5a7aa4) at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/expr.c:
1534
#6  0x000167d8 in check_intrinsic_op (e=0x5a7aa4, check_function=0x4459d8 
<error_message+11340>) at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/expr.c:1236
#7  0x00016f64 in check_restricted (e=0x5a7aa4) at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/expr.c:
1616
#8  0x00006318 in resolve_array_bound (e=0x5a7aa4, check_constant=4479448) at /Users/pinskia/
src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/array.c:219
#9  0x000063f0 in gfc_resolve_array_spec (as=0x42103d20, check_constant=0) at /Users/pinskia/src/
local/gcc/gcc/fortran/array.c:253
#10 0x0003c6b8 in resolve_symbol (sym=0x5a7aa4) at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/
resolve.c:4077
#11 0x000482ec in traverse_ns (st=0x421041e0, func=0x3c5b8 <resolve_symbol>) at /Users/
pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/symbol.c:2297
#12 0x00048308 in traverse_ns (st=0x421041e0, func=0x3c5b8 <resolve_symbol>) at /Users/
pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/symbol.c:2300
#13 0x0003c168 in gfc_resolve (ns=0x42103d20) at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/
resolve.c:4649
#14 0x00033ec8 in gfc_parse_file () at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/gcc/fortran/parse.c:2612
#15 0x0004aa60 in gfc_be_parse_file (set_yydebug=1108360480) at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/
gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c:266
#16 0x003356ac in toplev_main (argc=247224, argv=0x421041e0) at /Users/pinskia/src/local/gcc/
gcc/toplev.c:986


-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|                            |1
           Keywords|                            |ice-on-valid-code
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2004-11-02 13:37:10
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18271