From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id CCAC5386197F; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:43:12 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org CCAC5386197F DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1595853792; bh=5XZOId95OfUr7PdveBMnqz2ADa2HOTu3WRPlUSmTMIo=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Lf+67TStQZaEMoAVxgLwu+/ZCQ5ytpbHkORp3/tF8d9JqS0YFW7ZG0aLuGiyc+1nU rxlyc2o+P9UxY5mYY/hB9/5Becyhd8D+9QLrg2X5bRfRyonszcfKB/FWvHzBWIhSQD jPYPDtNPD+mkgQkdF2kQqBgDbypSGVulH0X2TOUw= From: "dev-zero at gentoo dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/77504] [8/9/10/11 Regression] "is used uninitialized" with allocatable string and array constructors Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:43:12 +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: diagnostic X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: dev-zero at gentoo dot org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.5 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-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:43:12 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D77504 --- Comment #23 from Tiziano M=C3=BCller --- (In reply to Thomas Koenig from comment #21) > (In reply to Tiziano M=C3=BCller from comment #19) > > I have yet another (more complicated) case, but this time not reproduci= ble > > with gcc-7.5, only with 9 and 10: >=20 > This is a different issue. I have opened PR 96312 for this. Thanks a lot! I prepared a new bug report initially, then I stumbled over t= his one and thought it could be the same.=