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 870993858D28; Tue,  2 Apr 2024 19:19:02 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 870993858D28
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1712085542;
	bh=tBQmN+VbTng/0lT/zsnoVKisAk2Pv05fpYFX38GXmMU=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=KXtsNNl9k5VpbO1+sS1j8dyjMqV9dRllBr+AGImEJ1LHURgz3Ae7th+z7BcBJpMu/
	 Mr5hgmhPluIgvz33n7DtKOrUu1ozMWzVb3jf0zWAzBmRb3siJ2xswoARIeTMQFWWJK
	 poy4yPpqVrs6ZF++DwJt3eAD0/WFoHBkmMz275Ts=
From: "anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/113956] [13/14 Regression] ice in
 gfc_trans_pointer_assignment, at fortran/trans-expr.cc:10524
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2024 19:19:01 +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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-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: 13.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-113956-4-TEfxf5so6L@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-113956-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-113956-4@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=3D113956

--- Comment #5 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #4)
> (In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #3)
> > I can see why the assert is there but it is manifestly wrong for both t=
he
> > assumed length target and a constant length.
>=20
> That's why I wanted to pass this on to you.  I am not sure what the preci=
se
> logic should be.
>=20
> > I was thrown a bit by the
> > distros nulling out the asserts so that it compiled just fine with the
> > system gfortran.
>=20
> If the system gfortran is based on 13.2 *release* then the bug is not yet
> there ;-)  It entered 13-branch through backport r13-7986.
>=20
> > Your patch is perfect :- This compiles and runs correctly:

Paul, if you want to commit the patch, consider it preapproved  :-)

Otherwise I would take it, but I fear possible subtleties in the logic
involved that I do not see...=