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 BDD233858284; Fri, 23 Dec 2022 03:47:20 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BDD233858284
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1671767240;
	bh=+gQPzKSw0ucud3rcoaaHvjWSOXrMZaSwE8/sqbTiih0=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=C6jrQqv7vPK462x+JVGU5GvKDvG0rmNSpQbvauPOWYmWQno6C/Qn9jBlbXbo3QKof
	 8SMeYwxNc35s6ii6ZD7Lb0rsl5HHfDcZKNf7nbZe1gkls3kGLH0H8jo0IvrBy2MNsy
	 GnKamZWe9OzPwKpF3CsxOxtN8Yb8E0nBeB7Ae7Sg=
From: "jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/106731] ICE on automatic array of derived type with
 DTIO
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2022 03:47:20 +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: 12.1.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jvdelisle 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: 
Message-ID: <bug-106731-4-ydJT84uIt3@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-106731-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-106731-4@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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D106731

--- Comment #9 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jerry DeLisle from comment #8)
> The simple patch does indeed fix the ICE at compile time.  It also
> regression tests cleanly.
>=20
> I am studying the results of running this test case to be sure it makes
> sense. The DTIO procedure in the example is not getting invoked from my
> first look.

Indeed it was not being invoked since the line:

   print *, 'n=3D',n,automatic(n)%x

Completely resolves the value of x.

If instead one uses:

   print *, 'n=3D',n,automatic

The DTIO procedure is invoked as expected. I will commit this one under sim=
ple
and obvious rule shortly with a test case.=