public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug fortran/63158] New: Possible wrong code with absend optional BT_CLASS -> optional BT_DERIVED dummy argument
@ 2014-09-03 18:49 burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-03-06 13:38 ` [Bug fortran/63158] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-09-03 18:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63158
Bug ID: 63158
Summary: Possible wrong code with absend optional BT_CLASS ->
optional BT_DERIVED dummy argument
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
Follow up to PR 62270 comment 3.
The following code adds conditionally a check whether a var == NULL check
should be added. I fear that some extra check for BT_CLASS might be needed,
e.g. when passing a BT_CLASS optional argument to a BT_DERIVED optional
argument (same declared type). Namely, in the case the actual argument is NULL.
trans-expr.c:gfc_conv_procedure_call
4445 if (fsym->attr.optional
4446 && e->expr_type == EXPR_VARIABLE
4447 && (!e->ref
4448 || (e->ref->type == REF_ARRAY
4449 && !e->ref->u.ar.type != AR_FULL))
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* [Bug fortran/63158] Possible wrong code with absend optional BT_CLASS -> optional BT_DERIVED dummy argument 2014-09-03 18:49 [Bug fortran/63158] New: Possible wrong code with absend optional BT_CLASS -> optional BT_DERIVED dummy argument burnus at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-03-06 13:38 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2015-09-04 9:11 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2015-10-08 10:05 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2015-03-06 13:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63158 Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed| |2015-03-06 Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> --- I cannot find any file in gcc/fortran containing the string "!e->ref->u.ar.type != AR_FULL" for 4.8, 4.9 and trunk (5.0). Is this PR still valid? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/63158] Possible wrong code with absend optional BT_CLASS -> optional BT_DERIVED dummy argument 2014-09-03 18:49 [Bug fortran/63158] New: Possible wrong code with absend optional BT_CLASS -> optional BT_DERIVED dummy argument burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-06 13:38 ` [Bug fortran/63158] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2015-09-04 9:11 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2015-10-08 10:05 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2015-09-04 9:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63158 --- Comment #2 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> --- Ping! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [Bug fortran/63158] Possible wrong code with absend optional BT_CLASS -> optional BT_DERIVED dummy argument 2014-09-03 18:49 [Bug fortran/63158] New: Possible wrong code with absend optional BT_CLASS -> optional BT_DERIVED dummy argument burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-06 13:38 ` [Bug fortran/63158] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2015-09-04 9:11 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2015-10-08 10:05 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: dominiq at lps dot ens.fr @ 2015-10-08 10:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63158 --- Comment #3 from Dominique d'Humieres <dominiq at lps dot ens.fr> --- > I cannot find any file in gcc/fortran containing the string > "!e->ref->u.ar.type != AR_FULL" for 4.8, 4.9 and trunk (5.0). It has been replaced with "e->ref->u.ar.type != AR_FULL" at line 5218: if (fsym->attr.optional && e->expr_type == EXPR_VARIABLE && (!e->ref || (e->ref->type == REF_ARRAY && e->ref->u.ar.type != AR_FULL)) && e->symtree->n.sym->attr.optional) Changed by r214827. > Is this PR still valid? *PING*! Should I close this PR as INVALID to get an answer? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-10-08 10:05 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2014-09-03 18:49 [Bug fortran/63158] New: Possible wrong code with absend optional BT_CLASS -> optional BT_DERIVED dummy argument burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2015-03-06 13:38 ` [Bug fortran/63158] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2015-09-04 9:11 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr 2015-10-08 10:05 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).