public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "rep dot nop at aon dot at" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/29284] [4.1/4.2 Regression] ICE for optional subroutine argument Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 15:28:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20061001152835.9954.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-29284-13327@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> ------- Comment #4 from rep dot nop at aon dot at 2006-10-01 15:28 ------- Note that i don't think i can approve anything. This patch fixes the following ICE for me: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2006-09/msg00460.html $ cat no.f90 MODULE MOD1 CONTAINS SUBROUTINE SUB1(arg) IMPLICIT NONE CHARACTER (LEN=*), OPTIONAL :: arg IF (PRESENT(arg)) WRITE(0,*) 'arg was ', arg STOP END SUBROUTINE SUB1 SUBROUTINE SUB2 CALL SUB1 END SUBROUTINE SUB2 END MODULE Used to give before this fix $ gfortran-4.2-HEAD -c no.f90 no.f90: In function 'sub2': no.f90:3: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault And with the fix compiles now as expected. PS: Just curious.. Why isn't this part of gfc_conv_function_call() coded to check for fsym once and only then have the additional checks? if (fsym) { CHECKS_NOT_INVOLVING_e; if (e) { CHECK_e_STUFF; } } It doesn't look like the order of most of these is significant since very different things are checked, so there should be no risk in writing this in a sleek manner. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29284
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-01 15:28 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2006-09-29 8:13 [Bug fortran/29284] New: " rakuen_himawari at yahoo dot co dot jp 2006-09-29 8:20 ` [Bug fortran/29284] [4.1/4.2 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-01 9:23 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-01 13:45 ` patchapp at dberlin dot org 2006-10-01 15:28 ` rep dot nop at aon dot at [this message] 2006-10-01 19:59 ` paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot fr 2006-10-01 23:05 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-03 20:13 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-03 20:16 ` pault at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-10-24 8:06 ` fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20061001152835.9954.qmail@sourceware.org \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).