From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id E8F253858421; Thu, 1 Jun 2023 19:47:31 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E8F253858421 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1685648851; bh=d1m7eBjjMRP7OOULp9y7Sa92+Nx5syRjl/maJzK+eVc=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=f5kVm0cnZ4K8VWR0i6rYxvaR1r8EzUHm4qQe77pcjD/+57KpI6ilkN3TZP3aLxwNA ++oC2LoO0FR/SHSM7dNz90pHOs+ZTvyg7okNBXNYQxbG5DgCesH8xy4nrkL0r2HlDU +GbkkrSuCWlEy2I7i+LfYJNidPkIgHN31d2ZEgxA= From: "sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/100607] ICE with SELECT RANK Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2023 19:47:31 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D100607 --- Comment #8 from Steve Kargl -= -- On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 07:26:43PM +0000, anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D100607 >=20 > --- Comment #7 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- > (In reply to kargl from comment #6) > > Created attachment 55191 [details] > > patch that fixes bug > >=20 > > The patch, which was previously submitted, still applies and fixes the = bug. >=20 > Sure. >=20 > Do you have an answer to your own remarks in comment#5? >=20 I've concluded that the bug was reported 2 years agos. It was fixed by a tentative patch 2 years laters. 'case_value =3D=3D -1' is for 'rank(*)'. 'case_value =3D=3D -2' appears to be for non-'rank(*)' cases, and those are handled in the preceding nested for-loop.=