From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-482743-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 64880 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2015 09:19:35 -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
Received: (qmail 64822 invoked by uid 48); 5 Apr 2015 09:19:31 -0000
From: "drikosev at otenet dot gr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/59016] f951: internal compiler error: Segmentation fault
Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2015 09:19:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.9.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: drikosev at otenet dot gr
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
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: <bug-59016-4-XxqyqNsf4l@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-59016-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-59016-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-04/txt/msg00295.txt.bz2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59016

--- Comment #15 from drikosev at otenet dot gr ---
Created attachment 35230
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35230&action=edit
altered patch for the regressions reported in comment 11

Hi,

As it seems the problem with the program bug.f90 is that the generic attribute
is set in a symbol as the parser tries to match a declaration type
specification; but finally, the statement isn't matched as such and the generic
attribute wasn't cleared.

So, the attached patch makes the cleanup, without causing the regressions
listed in comment 9.

The question here is if gfortran had to print an error message for this
program:

module types
  public :: undefined
end module types
write (*,*) "undefined types!"
end 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PS: I've not checked out the source code from a repo, so the attached patch is
just the output of the diff command (not svn diff).