From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id A17B13858405; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 19:55:28 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A17B13858405
From: "anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/102973] possible inconsistency in procptr_assignment
 handling when matching ASSOCIATE
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 19:55:28 +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: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_status everconfirmed cf_reconfirmed_on cc
Message-ID: <bug-102973-4-DVYWzj39pM@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-102973-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-102973-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 19:55:28 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D102973

anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2021-10-28
                 CC|                            |anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
The analysis seems correct.  The adusted logic would also agree with similar
code in gfc_match_pointer_assignment ().

I did play a little with ASSOCIATE to see if I could trigger a bug in mainl=
ine
due to running into a wrong gfc_matching_procptr_assignment, but didn't
succeed.

If you provide a patch for the above that regtests ok, it is pre-approved.

It is not clear to me how to get rid of gfc_matching_procptr_assignment
completely and easily.  One would need to inspect gfc_match_varspec ()
and gfc_match_rvalue () and their callers.  I'd recomment to defer that.=