[Bug fortran/59537] New: "Automatic array cannot have an initializer", for -finit-real and a SAVE statement present in subroutine

[Bug fortran/59537] New: "Automatic array cannot have an initializer", for -finit-real and a SAVE statement present in subroutine

[bugs at stellardeath dot org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59537

            Bug ID: 59537
           Summary: "Automatic array cannot have an initializer", for
                    -finit-real and a SAVE statement present in subroutine
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.9.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: fortran
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: bugs at stellardeath dot org

Created attachment 31461
  --> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=31461&action=edit
Minimal example code

The following valid, minimal example code

      subroutine foo(n)
      implicit none
      integer n
      real :: a(1:n)
      save
      a(1) = 3
      end subroutine foo

cannot be compiled with -finit-real. The presence of the catch-all SAVE
statement seems to affect this, even though it should not apply to the
automatic array a (right?):

#> gfortran -finit-real=nan -c minimal.f90
minimal.f:4.20:

      real :: a(1:n)                                                    
                    1
Error: Automatic array 'a' at (1) cannot have an initializer
#>

Without the SAVE statement it compiles fine.

I see this with the installed gfortran 4.8.2 from openSUSE and also with a
self-compiled gfortran from today (2013-12-17):

#> gfortran --version
GNU Fortran (SUSE Linux) 4.8.2 20131210 [gcc-4_8-branch revision 205857]
Copyright (C) 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

GNU Fortran comes with NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
You may redistribute copies of GNU Fortran
under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
For more information about these matters, see the file named COPYING


#> ~/sys/stow/gcc-2013-12-17/bin/gfortran --version
GNU Fortran (GCC) 4.9.0 20131217 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

GNU Fortran comes with NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.
You may redistribute copies of GNU Fortran
under the terms of the GNU General Public License.
For more information about these matters, see the file named COPYING

[Bug fortran/59537] "Automatic array cannot have an initializer", for -finit-real and a SAVE statement present in subroutine

[bugs at stellardeath dot org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59537

--- Comment #1 from Lorenz Hüdepohl <bugs at stellardeath dot org> ---
Maybe related to the already fixed #51800?
>From gcc-bugs-return-444178-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Wed Feb 19 09:28:29 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-444178-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 14553 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2014 09:28:28 -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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 14525 invoked by uid 48); 19 Feb 2014 09:28:24 -0000
From: "dominiq at lps dot ens.fr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/59537] "Automatic array cannot have an initializer", for -finit-real and a SAVE statement present in subroutine
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 09:28:00 -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: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
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: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-59537-4-MZNLoOQKU7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-59537-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-59537-4@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: 2014-02/txt/msg01935.txt.bz2
Content-length: 604

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idY537

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2014-02-19
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> Maybe related to the already fixed #51800?

Maybe, but this PR is still present on trunk (4.9 r207856), 4.7.4 and 4.8.2.

[Bug fortran/59537] "An automatic object shall not have the SAVE attribute." is not diagnosed.

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59537

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |accepts-invalid
            Summary|"Automatic array cannot     |"An automatic object shall
                   |have an initializer", for   |not have the SAVE
                   |-finit-real and a SAVE      |attribute." is not
                   |statement present in        |diagnosed.
                   |subroutine                  |

--- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> Maybe related to the already fixed #51800?

The difference is that in pr51800 the array is a dummy argument, while here it
is an automatic array. Looking at the f2008 standard, I see

5.2 Type declaration statements

5.2.1 Syntax

...

C506 (R503) An initialization shall not appear if object-name is a dummy
argument, a function result, an object in a named common block unless the type
declaration is in a block data program unit, an object in blank common, an
allocatable variable, an external function, an intrinsic function, or an
automatic object.

...

5.2.2 Automatic data objects

An automatic data object is a nondummy data object with a type parameter or
array bound that depends on the value of a speci\fcation-expr that is not a
constant expression.

C513 An automatic object shall not have the SAVE attribute.

...

From the above gfortran is right to reject the code with initialization.

> Without the SAVE statement it compiles fine.

>From the above (C513) this is a bug, the code should give an error without/with
-finit-*.
>From gcc-bugs-return-447186-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat Mar 22 20:43:52 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-447186-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 26184 invoked by alias); 22 Mar 2014 20:43:52 -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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 26154 invoked by uid 48); 22 Mar 2014 20:43:48 -0000
From: "dominiq at lps dot ens.fr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/51292] RESULT var with -finit-local-zero -fno-automatic results in error
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 20:43:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.7.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
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: bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on everconfirmed
Message-ID: <bug-51292-4-rR4xZYEJk5@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-51292-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-51292-4@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: 2014-03/txt/msg02055.txt.bz2
Content-length: 858

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idQ292

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |WAITING
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2014-03-22
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
The code in comment 0 compiles for me with 4.8.2 and trunk. It is rejected by
4.7.4 with

pr51292.f90:5.27:

function bar (a) result (h)
                           1
Error: Function result 'h' at (1) cannot have an initializer

(twice, changed to only once between r190090 and r195731). The error
disappeared between r195931 and r196108.

Could this PR be closed as fixed?

[Bug fortran/59537] "An automatic object shall not have the SAVE attribute." is not diagnosed.

[bugs at stellardeath dot org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59537

--- Comment #4 from Lorenz Hüdepohl <bugs at stellardeath dot org> ---
> From the above gfortran is right to reject the code with initialization.
>
> > Without the SAVE statement it compiles fine.
>
> From the above (C513) this is a bug, the code should give an error without/with -finit-*.

I guess my point is, that I do _not_ specify

  real, save :: a(1:n)

which would be illegal, but merely

  real :: a(1:n)
  save

in which case the "SAVE" statement should apply to all variables to which it
can apply - that is _not_ to the automatic dummy argument "a".

Nonetheless, code that compiles without -finit-real should also compile with
-finit-real, right?
>From gcc-bugs-return-447194-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat Mar 22 23:31:42 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-447194-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 24833 invoked by alias); 22 Mar 2014 23:31:42 -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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 24791 invoked by uid 48); 22 Mar 2014 23:31:38 -0000
From: "dominiq at lps dot ens.fr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/29892] substring out of bounds: Missing variable name for variables with parameter attribute
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 23:31:00 -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: 4.3.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
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: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-29892-4-0Xg0Y1jV1M@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-29892-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-29892-4@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: 2014-03/txt/msg02063.txt.bz2
Content-length: 572

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id)892

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #9 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> Is this PR fixed or not?

No answer since 9 months, no activity since 6 years. Closing as FIXED. Please
open a new PR for remaining issues.

[Bug fortran/59537] No "Automatic array cannot have an initializer", for -finit-real without a SAVE statement present in subroutine

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59537

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Summary|"An automatic object shall  |No "Automatic array cannot
                   |not have the SAVE           |have an initializer", for
                   |attribute." is not          |-finit-real without a SAVE
                   |diagnosed.                  |statement present in
                   |                            |subroutine

--- Comment #5 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
>  real :: a(1:n)
>  save
>
> in which case the "SAVE" statement should apply to all variables to which
> it can apply - that is _not_ to the automatic dummy argument "a".

You are right:

5.4.14 SAVE statement
...
1 A SAVE statement with a saved entity list speci\fes the SAVE attribute
(5.3.16) for a list of entities. A SAVE statement without a saved entity list
is treated as though it contained the names of all allowed items in the same
scoping unit.

I thought that the SAVE statement applied to ALL local variables, my bad.

> Nonetheless, code that compiles without -finit-real should also compile
> with -finit-real, right?

I disagree: C506 states that automatic object cannot be initialized. What is
wrong is that it depends on the presence of the SAVE statement without a saved
entity list.
>From gcc-bugs-return-447197-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sun Mar 23 00:07:55 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-447197-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 8929 invoked by alias); 23 Mar 2014 00:07:54 -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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 8895 invoked by uid 48); 23 Mar 2014 00:07:49 -0000
From: "dominiq at lps dot ens.fr" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libfortran/35667] HP-UX 10 has broken strtod
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 00:07:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libfortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 4.3.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
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: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-35667-4-TAylxtHGHP@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-35667-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-35667-4@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: 2014-03/txt/msg02066.txt.bz2
Content-length: 665

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id5667

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|WAITING                     |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #10 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
> > Was that fixed with John's commit?
> I think so.  I believe this was left open because the patch wasn't
> back ported.

The patch was committed in 4.6 or 4.7 (3 years ago), so the back porting issue
in now moot. Closing as FIXED.

[Bug fortran/59537] No "Automatic array cannot have an initializer", for -finit-real without a SAVE statement present in subroutine

[bugs at stellardeath dot org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59537

--- Comment #6 from Lorenz Hüdepohl <bugs at stellardeath dot org> ---
>> Nonetheless, code that compiles without -finit-real should also compile
>> with -finit-real, right?
>
> I disagree: C506 states that automatic object cannot be initialized. What is 
> wrong is that it depends on the presence of the SAVE statement without a saved
> entity list.

Well, I guess it depends on what meaning one wants to assign to the flag
-finit-real, which is anyway not something the standard specifies, right?

Do you really want to restrict the usage of -finit-real to programs where every
last variable is initializable?

I always use -finit-real as a kind of debug feature, with -finit-real=snan, to
check for the use of uninitialized values. I did never expect that it should
have a well defined, standard-mandated effect.
>From gcc-bugs-return-451342-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon May 12 14:39:40 2014
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-451342-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 5910 invoked by alias); 12 May 2014 14:39:40 -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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 5663 invoked by uid 48); 12 May 2014 14:39:37 -0000
From: "jason at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/6273] [DR 502] Dependency of nested enumerations and enumerators
Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 14:39:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 2.95.3
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: rejects-valid
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: jason at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED
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: bug_status resolution
Message-ID: <bug-6273-4-lBWVpyH3JK@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-6273-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-6273-4@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: 2014-05/txt/msg01034.txt.bz2
Content-length: 613

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idb73

Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #18 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #16)
> Jason, I'm having a look to this, and I'm not sure there is still something
> to do.

I agree.  The template op+ is found by argument-dependent lookup.

[Bug fortran/59537] No "Automatic array cannot have an initializer", for -finit-real without a SAVE statement present in subroutine

[dominiq at lps dot ens.fr]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59537

Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |urbanjost at comcast dot net

--- Comment #7 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> ---
*** Bug 67388 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***