From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18757 invoked by alias); 24 Feb 2014 09:20:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 18693 invoked by uid 55); 24 Feb 2014 09:20:13 -0000 From: "paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/59198] [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] ICE on cyclically dependent polymorphic types Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 09:20:00 -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: ice-on-valid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.7.4 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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: 2014-02/txt/msg02428.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198 --- Comment #10 from paul.richard.thomas at gmail dot com --- A further small remark, when the explicit interface for obs1_int is turned to a subroutine, everything works perfectly. I am homing in on this as being the source of the trouble; I suspect that the function pointer is not receiving the DEC_SIZE information. I will look tonight. On 23 February 2014 21:49, pault at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59198 > > --- Comment #9 from Paul Thomas --- > Hi Tobias, > > I need to walk away from this one for 24 hours. > > I have established this chain: > (i) We start building decay_t; > (ii) During which we have to build decay_gen_t (from trans-types.c:2456); > (iii) Followed by decay_term_t; > (iv) Which has a decay_t as its only component; > (v) Since this is in the process of being built, what is retruned is the > backend_decl without any of the fields. Thus the size cannot be determined; > (vi) For reasons that I cannot see, since this component is a pointer, > indeterminate size this propagates back to the size of the decay_gen_t > component in decay_t; and > (vii) This I suppose but have not confirmed, clobbers the initialisation of the > vtable. > > This latter is surmise, on the basis that changing the 'term' field to a > pointer still causes the size problem but the ICE goes away. The programme even > executes! > > I cannot see why there is a problem in estimating the size, since the relevant > components are either allocatable or pointers - thus the size can be > determined. > > Cheers > > Paul > > -- > You are receiving this mail because: > You are on the CC list for the bug.