From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 2E6793858D32; Mon, 12 Jun 2023 07:13:42 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 2E6793858D32 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1686554022; bh=FiO1WlwZYdygGC3wyfZCEIS6tMwJfQrAxoBzCS44J54=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=A/bsKOpuuWLq9CALp7AgE+wKOoWgTmezDIp1OhT0PF0PyA/Q5qwjdMui2fYHunAVF oAkxeJHZbH3tund+TBMnmpTib/vETpPseew8kCzPs66Fupg9X8C/llWTwH5cxXjpZk ZXrbYlocN8X0zP3NAftJIAVyQtuyqTrvCBr1EsXc= From: "mikael at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug fortran/86277] Presence of optional arguments not recognized for zero length arrays Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2023 07:13:41 +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: 8.1.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: mikael at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P4 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: anlauf 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 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D86277 --- Comment #21 from Mikael Morin --- (In reply to anlauf from comment #20) >=20 > This patch fails for me on several occasions including the testsuite. > I guess the logic was intended as follows: >=20 Well, not really, it seems wasteful to use the heap for something known to = be useless anyway. But I agree that your variant is probably safer.=