[Bug fortran/24643] New: Unclassifiable statement on character substring concatenation

[Bug fortran/24643] New: Unclassifiable statement on character substring concatenation

[toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl]

gfortran issues an "Unclassifiable statement" error when trying
to compile a statement with concatenation of substrings of
character variables.


-- 
           Summary: Unclassifiable statement on character substring
                    concatenation
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.1.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: fortran
        AssignedTo: unassigned at gcc dot gnu dot org
        ReportedBy: toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on character substring concatenation

[toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl]

------- Comment #1 from toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl  2005-11-02 20:36 -------
Created an attachment (id=10114)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10114&action=view)
Test case for this bug

Test case added.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on character substring concatenation

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #2 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-11-02 20:39 -------
Confirmed.


-- 

pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1
           Keywords|                            |rejects-valid
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2005-11-02 20:39:10
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on character substring concatenation

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #3 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-11-02 20:42 -------
schluter@pcl247d:~/src/gcc> ../gcc/build/gcc/f951  -quiet -fsyntax-only
Warning: Reading file '<stdin>' as free form.
      PROGRAM TABLES
      IMPLICIT CHARACTER*8(Y)
        YBTABLE=Ylocal(1:2)
      END
schluter@pcl247d:~/src/gcc> ../gcc/build/gcc/f951  -quiet -fsyntax-only
Warning: Reading file '<stdin>' as free form.
      PROGRAM TABLES
      IMPLICIT CHARACTER*8(Y)
      WRITE(YLOCAL,'(I2.2)') ILOCAL
        YBTABLE=Ylocal(1:2)
      END
 In file :4

 YBTABLE=Ylocal(1:2)
1
Error: Unclassifiable statement at (1)
schluter@pcl247d:~/src/gcc> ../gcc/build/gcc/f951  -quiet -fsyntax-only
Warning: Reading file '<stdin>' as free form.
      PROGRAM TABLES
      IMPLICIT CHARACTER*8(Y)
      ybtable='b'
        YBTABLE=Ylocal(1:2)
      END
schluter@pcl247d:~/src/gcc> ../gcc/build/gcc/f951  -quiet -fsyntax-only
Warning: Reading file '<stdin>' as free form.
      PROGRAM TABLES
      IMPLICIT CHARACTER*8(Y)
      WRITE(YLOCAL,'(I2.2)') ILOCAL
      ybtable='b'
        YBTABLE=Ylocal(1:2)
      END
 In file :5

 YBTABLE=Ylocal(1:2)
1
Error: Unclassifiable statement at (1)
schluter@pcl247d:~/src/gcc> ../gcc/build/gcc/f951  -quiet -fsyntax-only
Warning: Reading file '<stdin>' as free form.
      PROGRAM TABLES
      IMPLICIT CHARACTER*8(Y)
      WRITE(YLOCAL,'(I2.2)') ILOCAL
      ybtable='b'
        YBTABLE=Ylocal
      END
schluter@pcl247d:~/src/gcc> 


-- 

tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

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


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed character substring

[tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #4 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-11-02 21:13 -------
g77 groks this:

$ cat grg.f
      PROGRAM TABLES
      IMPLICIT CHARACTER*8(Y)
      WRITE(YLOCAL,'(I2.2)') ILOCAL
        YBTABLE=Ylocal(1:2)
      END
$ g77 grg.f
$ 


-- 

tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|                            |19292
              nThis|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed character substring

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #5 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-11-02 22:12 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> ...

I forgot to say that these are all syntactically valid variations of the same
theme.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed character substring

[toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl]

------- Comment #6 from toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl  2005-11-03 19:34 -------
Mine ! All Mine !


-- 

toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot gnu   |toon at moene dot indiv dot
                   |dot org                     |nluug dot nl
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed|2005-11-02 20:39:10         |2005-11-03 19:34:54
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed character substring

[toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl]

------- Comment #7 from toon at moene dot indiv dot nluug dot nl  2005-11-05 11:51 -------
I got some preliminary results from debugging.
By -fdump-parse-tree, YLOCAL does have the correct (implicitly
determined) type of CHARACTER*8 at statement "YLOCAL='A'".
However, by the time we reach gfc_match_rvalue for the next
statement "YBTABLE=YLOCAL(1:2)" its type is BT_UNKNOWN.
So something has to squash the correctly determined type.
How does one find out ?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed character substring

[steven at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-11-07 23:29 -------
We get to "check_substring:" in match_varspec:

        PROGRAM P
        IMPLICIT CHARACTER*8 (Y)
        YLOCAL='A'
        YBTABLE=YLOCAL(1:2)
        END

check_substring:
  if (primary->ts.type == BT_CHARACTER)
    {
      switch (match_substring (primary->ts.cl, equiv_flag, &substring))
        {
        case MATCH_YES:
          if (tail == NULL)
            primary->ref = substring;

But at this point, while we have matched YLOCAL in the second assignment, we
still haven't picked up a type for it.  So primary->ts.type == BT_UNKNOWN and
we never even try to match the substring.

I'm not sure if YLOCAL should have just picked up a type earlier.  Thoughts,
Tobi?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed character substring

[Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de]

------- Comment #9 from Tobias dot Schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de  2005-11-07 23:43 -------
Subject: Re:  Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed
 character substring

steven at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> ------- Comment #8 from steven at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-11-07 23:29 -------
> We get to "check_substring:" in match_varspec:
> 
>         PROGRAM P
>         IMPLICIT CHARACTER*8 (Y)
>         YLOCAL='A'
>         YBTABLE=YLOCAL(1:2)
>         END
> 
> check_substring:
>   if (primary->ts.type == BT_CHARACTER)
>     {
>       switch (match_substring (primary->ts.cl, equiv_flag, &substring))
>         {
>         case MATCH_YES:
>           if (tail == NULL)
>             primary->ref = substring;
> 
> But at this point, while we have matched YLOCAL in the second assignment, we
> still haven't picked up a type for it.  So primary->ts.type == BT_UNKNOWN and
> we never even try to match the substring.
> 
> I'm not sure if YLOCAL should have just picked up a type earlier.  Thoughts,
> Tobi?

It should have picked up a type in the first assignment.  Why it doesn't, I
don't know.  Apparently, the failure is conditional on the facts that A) there
already exists a symbol and B) this symbol doesn't have a type at that point.

I'll look into this in more depth tomorrow.  I remember that last time I
looked into these issues (back before Jakub fixed PR18833), I noticed that the
matching of primaries had been completely reworked in g95, and I can't think
of any other bug relating to that than this one, so this bug might well turn
out to be a snake pit.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed character substring

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #10 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-11-08 20:55 -------
Correction: implicit types are only assigned during resolution.  The issue is:
why does it reject the second statement if the RHS object already exists, but
not otherwise?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed character substring

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #11 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-11-08 23:58 -------
Patch posted.


-- 

tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|toon at moene dot indiv dot |tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org
                   |nluug dot nl                |
                URL|                            |http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortra
                   |                            |n/2005-11/msg00255.html
           Keywords|                            |patch


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed character substring

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #12 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-11-10 21:49 -------
Subject: Bug 24643

Author: tobi
Date: Thu Nov 10 21:49:29 2005
New Revision: 106753

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=106753
Log:
fortran/
PR fortran/24643
* primary.c (match_varspec): Check for implicitly typed CHARACTER
variables before matching substrings.

testsuite/
PR fortran/24643
* gfortran.dg/implicit_6.f90, gfortran.dg/implicit_7.f90: New.

Added:
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_6.f90
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_7.f90
Modified:
    trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
    trunk/gcc/fortran/primary.c
    trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed character substring

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #14 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-11-10 23:11 -------
Fixed.


-- 

tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED
   Target Milestone|---                         |4.0.3


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed character substring

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #13 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-11-10 23:10 -------
Subject: Bug 24643

Author: tobi
Date: Thu Nov 10 23:10:51 2005
New Revision: 106757

URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=106757
Log:
Backport r106753

fortran/
PR fortran/24643
* primary.c (match_varspec): Check for implicitly typed CHARACTER
variables before matching substrings.

testsuite/
PR fortran/24643
* gfortran.dg/implicit_6.f90, gfortran.dg/implicit_7.f90: New.

Added:
    branches/gcc-4_0-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_6.f90
      - copied unchanged from r106753,
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_6.f90
    branches/gcc-4_0-branch/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_7.f90
      - copied unchanged from r106753,
trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implicit_7.f90
Modified:
    branches/gcc-4_0-branch/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog
    branches/gcc-4_0-branch/gcc/fortran/primary.c
    branches/gcc-4_0-branch/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643

[Bug fortran/24643] Unclassifiable statement on implicitly typed character substring

[tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #15 from tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-11-10 23:15 -------
*** Bug 22048 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***


-- 

tobi at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |h dot j dot j dot vandam at
                   |                            |dl dot ac dot uk


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24643