From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 190E33858C74; Thu, 20 Apr 2023 19:02:48 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 190E33858C74 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1682017368; bh=JCb7ezG6eyUIkGADVdkHuHvByODxJDxgR7m48UU2mRY=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Mu6kEBUmc6nmNYd2WMZFBYbL9VogJ+nhNYtDHq2FL/1+o5AknAD6ZblgiVDzq3McY hUseMR8rxgY9JM+fi0tWRkafa0cFWWgI1N5qpaCODq4GOExK80u+oDN88nHcySnWQS LJUZubxAIrwVDN9PSkNryaY+rFUf5XOLWkizlpxA= From: "anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/109500] SIGABRT when calling a function that returns an unallocated value Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2023 19:02:47 +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: attachments.created 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=3D109500 --- Comment #20 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 54894 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=3D54894&action=3Dedit Extended testcase Testcase for Steve's variant of the diagnostic, checking that we also catch procedure pointers with the same interface. This testcase has been cross-checked with NAG. The missing diagnostic with Intel has been acknowledged, see: https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-Fortran-Compiler/Allocatable-function-= result-should-not-have-allocatable/m-p/1478494#M166138 I think we can proceed so that people can fix their codes in time for gcc-1= 4.=