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 6A8DD38582B1; Wed, 28 Sep 2022 18:53:16 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 6A8DD38582B1
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1664391196;
	bh=8KzlevKjfohmKvB3FlFuLYwdpaGV+SsEqo91hJV4m58=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=JymmTaLgnyO0NoTBjfHTkD9h9I2xuoUTzU3zbqDwmL9myufKHjMYBWRp7ALV5LufK
	 T9t4f2zPOP4tBScEEt+C+V8ldC40nTPLSViTIOvT90lwdgpRPmD+zc6LEgb4qO4i0W
	 2eD0BY1i41PI1OasGGS4oVrwBPus2drDHpuZAo0I=
From: "anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/107074] ICE: Bad IO basetype (8)
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2022 18:53:16 +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: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-invalid-code
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
Message-ID: <bug-107074-4-dsmPjBwOoT@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107074-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107074-4@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=3D107074

anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2022-09-28

--- Comment #1 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Confirmed.

(gdb) p ts->type=20
$3 =3D BT_PROCEDURE

We don't have an implementation for printing the address(?) of a procedure,
which is what NVidia does.

Intel does not like the code, but for different reasons.

Looking at the standard, I only found:

C1233 (R1217) An expression that is an output-item shall not have a value t=
hat
is a procedure pointer.

While a is not a procedure pointer, I don't see why such a procedure refere=
nce
can be allowed.=