From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6211 invoked by alias); 18 Jul 2015 10:01:22 -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 6177 invoked by uid 48); 18 Jul 2015 10:01:18 -0000 From: "juergen.reuter at desy dot de" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/66927] [6.0 regression] ICE in gfc_conf_procedure_call Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2015 10:01:00 -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: unknown X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: juergen.reuter at desy dot de X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 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: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2015-07/txt/msg01620.txt.bz2 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D66927 --- Comment #4 from J=C3=BCrgen Reuter --- Actually, we are using now allocate (obj(1:size (func ())) obj =3D func () as you are saying=20 allocate (obj, source =3D func ()) had problems in gfortran 4.7.X.=20 So the issue is not a problem for our code(s).=20 But you are saying that the code triggering the ICE violates the Fortran standard? >>From gcc-bugs-return-492731-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Sat Jul 18 10:15:32 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 72443 invoked by alias); 18 Jul 2015 10:15:32 -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 Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 72397 invoked by uid 48); 18 Jul 2015 10:15:28 -0000 From: "vehre at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/66927] [6.0 regression] ICE in gfc_conf_procedure_call Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2015 10:15:00 -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: unknown X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: vehre at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 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: 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: 2015-07/txt/msg01621.txt.bz2 Content-length: 795 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66927 vehre at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |vehre at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from vehre at gcc dot gnu.org --- I am not that bold anymore to interpret the nasty standard. I wanted to express, that the allocate(obj, source=func()) is now sufficient. I made some bad experience trying to interpret the standard and was told off not to do so. Therefore, I will not say "yes, it violates the standard" nor "no, it doesn't". Given there are many programs, that use the work-around you've shown, I am unsure what to do here. But you are right, ICE'ing is a no go.