From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id BF8CA3851C0A; Sat, 27 Jun 2020 19:26:30 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org BF8CA3851C0A
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1593285990;
 bh=WZzlPS6lij8VkjUQk97QQTd8UjW+AWdTzp/s7O13Xqo=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=xLJXa2yUSRifefwwZx2w3iadvGi7JOYe0xSLv3zfPYaPjUF8aFMLJcobnBTAWqifC
 y0bhPzczAGMVh5FI4JWkEM8ZLuL1qMxPGiPL7R8kcCRbdyPP0oSCcCH3jXxqRuE3/V
 SwSjqRjOoi2jx526HiMIz5B8+lZCMVi9hzQLrxEI=
From: "segher at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/95918] gfortran.dg/char4-subscript.f90 fails for BE
 architectures
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 19:26:30 +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: 10.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: segher 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: 
Message-ID: <bug-95918-4-2mePfhOfkL@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-95918-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-95918-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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 <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 19:26:30 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D95918

--- Comment #4 from Segher Boessenkool <segher at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Or even just  { target le }  yes.  You can put that as the selector on just
the scan tests, and even do a separate BE version as well.

You can quote regexps with {} instead of "", that makes them much more
readable.  The regexps seem to use . where they mean a literal dot, too?
Won't matter too much of course.

! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump "  \\(\\*var\\.str2\\)\\\[1\\\]{lb: 1 sz: 4} =
=3D
.d\\\\x00\\\\x00.\\\[1\\\]{lb: 1 sz: 4};" "original" } }

can become

! { dg-final { scan-tree-dump {  \(\*var\.str2\)\[1\]{lb: 1 sz: 4} =3D
.d\\x00\\x00.\[1\]{lb: 1 sz: 4};} "original" { target le } } }

and whatever BE needs.=