public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "mikael at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/93483] ICE in gfc_constructor_copy, at fortran/constructor.c:103
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 17:38:14 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-93483-4-3jZ3nyAIcp@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-93483-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93483

--- Comment #27 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to anlauf from comment #25)
> (In reply to Mikael Morin from comment #24)
> > First, the ARITH_INVALID_TYPE should be renamed as it has now a broader
> > usage (ARITH_OP_NOT_LITERAL_VALUE is a bit long, ARITH_OP_NOT_CONSTANT is a
> > bit misleading, ARITH_OP_NOT_SIMPLIFIED not great either, any other idea?).
> 
> I think we should keep the enum ARITH_INVALID_TYPE for those cases where it
> is appropriate,

Are there such cases remaining?  It seems that that value can't be returned any
more.

> I was contemplating either ARITH_NOT_REDUCED or
> ARITH_CANNOT_REDUCE,
> and opted for the latter.
> 
I have a slight preference for the former but let's go with the latter if you
prefer.  But please add a comment describing it in the definition.
Most enum values have an obvious meaning there, this one less so.


> > Second, I'm wondering whether the check in reduce_binary_aa shouldn't be
> > moved to reduce binary where it would be more clear.
> 
> I agree that it is preferable to have checks already in reduce_binary, see
> updated patch.  After this one could remove the check from reduce_binary_aa,
> as it would be redundant.
> 
And there is a redundant check in reduce_unary as well.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-10-15 17:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <bug-93483-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2020-12-06 22:13 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-12-07 21:52 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-11 16:59 ` gscfq@t-online.de
2022-10-12 19:46 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-13 16:35 ` kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-13 18:43 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-13 18:52 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2022-10-13 19:09 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-13 19:26 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2022-10-13 19:35 ` mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-13 19:55 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-13 20:02 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2022-10-13 20:29 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-13 20:56 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-13 21:39 ` sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu
2022-10-14 19:06 ` mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-14 19:13 ` mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-14 19:14 ` mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-14 19:19 ` mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-14 19:24 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-14 20:14 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-14 21:21 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-15  9:28 ` mikael at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-15 13:55 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-15 13:56 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-15 17:38 ` mikael at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2022-10-15 19:56 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-17 17:26 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-17 17:39 ` anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-93483-4-3jZ3nyAIcp@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
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).