From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-336081-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 21379 invoked by alias); 7 Nov 2010 14:33:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 21365 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Nov 2010 14:33:02 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,TW_JV
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sun, 07 Nov 2010 14:32:58 +0000
From: "jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/46331] Compilation time long with simple function in array constructor
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-46331-4-cyjb05oJHB@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-46331-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-46331-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2010 14:33:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-11/txt/msg00814.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46331

--- Comment #2 from Jerry DeLisle <jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-11-07 14:32:47 UTC ---
Patch: The part removed too agressively decides if an expression is constant. 
In the case of rand(), the result obviously does not reduce to a constant but
the array constructor was expanded.  Returning zero here means the function is
not constant and therefore the array is not expanded at compile time.

Regression tested OK on x86-64.

Index: expr.c
===================================================================
--- expr.c    (revision 166382)
+++ expr.c    (working copy)
@@ -900,7 +900,6 @@ int
 gfc_is_constant_expr (gfc_expr *e)
 {
   gfc_constructor *c;
-  gfc_actual_arglist *arg;

   if (e == NULL)
     return 1;
@@ -921,19 +920,8 @@ gfc_is_constant_expr (gfc_expr *e)
       /* Specification functions are constant.  */
       if (check_specification_function (e) == MATCH_YES)
     return 1;
+      return 0;

-      /* Call to intrinsic with at least one argument.  */
-      if (e->value.function.isym && e->value.function.actual)
-    {
-      for (arg = e->value.function.actual; arg; arg = arg->next)
-        if (!gfc_is_constant_expr (arg->expr))
-          return 0;
-
-      return 1;
-    }
-      else
-    return 0;
-
     case EXPR_CONSTANT:
     case EXPR_NULL:
       return 1;