From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-413493-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 30500 invoked by alias); 28 Jan 2013 22:43:09 -0000
Received: (qmail 30455 invoked by uid 48); 28 Jan 2013 22:42:49 -0000
From: "janus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/54107] [4.8 Regression] [F03] Memory hog with abstract interface
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 22:43:00 -0000
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: janus at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: janus at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-54107-4-Cz5dSvUmdf@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-54107-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-54107-4@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
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: 2013-01/txt/msg02612.txt.bz2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54107

--- Comment #27 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-01-28 22:42:48 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> There is one case that remains to be handled.  I suppose it is valid if the
> other are valid.
> 
>   function foo () result(bar)
>     procedure(foo), pointer :: bar 
>   end function

Yes, in principle proc-ptr valued functions are allowed. I don't see why it
wouldn't be valid.

This ICEs for me with 4.6, 4.7 and trunk (with the current patches for this
PR).