From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-476226-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 26002 invoked by alias); 6 Feb 2015 11:19:25 -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 25901 invoked by uid 48); 6 Feb 2015 11:19:22 -0000
From: "mikael at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/64952] Missing temporary in assignment from elemental function
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2015 11:19:00 -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: 5.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-64952-4-XgxF8LclIG@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-64952-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-64952-4@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: 2015-02/txt/msg00559.txt.bz2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64952

Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mikael at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #2 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Paul Thomas from comment #0)
> Fortunately, it only affects contained functions so that we do not have to
> carry it across when using modules.
> 
Don't we have to?
Wouldn't it be the same if ARRAY and FRED were use-associated symbols, or
if FRED was accessing ARRAY through use-association instead of
host-association?

(In reply to Tobias Burnus from comment #1)
> On the other hand, it would be probably
> faster to do:
>   tmp = pure_function()
>   array = elemental(array) * tmp
> which also avoids this problem.

As far as I know, the scalarizer does this already (in both cases where
pure_function is scalar and non-scalar).


By the way, a temporary is also necessary for
    array = Fred(index, other_array)
that is, array need not be as argument to Fred.