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 58E423858D33; Wed, 19 Apr 2023 19:06:26 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 58E423858D33
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1681931186;
	bh=29lstK9i/Y19xYG/9apBqFgmME09ciS5s0M5LpYHXvw=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=XLTCmtpQqLNklzqC/DZ3l5ypPlFw/0VWeULEJ6GAF8rsLZDbjMf/zv2rFRb6jWb/f
	 alxeRo0iuCiUUkTifG8kTq2bJXKxg7C/InrUMDG+cVsUo1IrcrrwMdSEZIa8/f0oQO
	 RzmbX76jGzbn2NHePhsFNpw23UXQukw+SXpP0tFw=
From: "anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/109500] SIGABRT when calling a function that returns an
 unallocated value
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2023 19:06:26 +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: accepts-invalid, diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P5
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-109500-4-GudQubupiD@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-109500-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-109500-4@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=3D109500

anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #14 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Leandro Lupori from comment #12)
> Its inclusion in flang (with a portability warning) is being analyzed:
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D147614

Thanks for this link, which has pointers to the J3 list including:

https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/2012-April/005029.html

and the thread starting at

https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/2017-March/010158.html

with a clarification by Malcolm Cohen:

https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/2017-March/010181.html

> However, the main motivation was to improve compatibility with other
> compilers, such as gfortran and ifort.

Compatibility should be best for standard-conforming code... ;-)
I'm still waiting for a response from Intel.

> I'm trying to check with the issue reporter how extensive is his usage of
> this extension and how much effort it would require for him to avoid using
> it.=