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 E14AB3857C5D; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 17:47:47 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E14AB3857C5D
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
 s=default; t=1594489667;
 bh=0QYLvHDIW/6+Oqo0hN9/bz4WZ3rYwKmSrCHRON0KH2A=;
 h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
 b=KMs1gQ/m6hTKoanDixr6JdjY0OSaxyCIVG6k4AS+zI0ggn6Le6uZWQuVm1FAZ4dTW
 EXOHkXMcA3lTDjXvcHPz9srn1rW6pv9QoUxf5Dkrxmxn9yUxR+XZx6+ZolDlhxGEfh
 o6uPxBSfQolk0SwwLTOAiesC7b0niiw7bbreG1q8=
From: "tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/95998] gfc_typename use of static memory
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2020 17:47:47 +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: tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING
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-95998-4-1cZVZWkBMe@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-95998-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-95998-4@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, 11 Jul 2020 17:47:48 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D95998

--- Comment #2 from Thomas Koenig <tkoenig at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Dominique d'Humieres from comment #1)
> Is static in C/C++ equivalent of SAVE in fortran (at least in the context=
 of
> gfc_typename)?

Yes.

> If yes, AFAIU the code the odd access to gfc_typename use buffer2, while
> even ones
> use buffer1? Wouldn't it be simple (safer?) to use only buffer1?
>=20
>   static char buffer[GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN + 7];  /* 7 for "TYPE()" + '\0'. =
 */
>   gfc_typespec *ts1;
>   gfc_charlen_t length =3D 0;
>=20
> Same thing for gfc_dummy_typename, gfc_typename, ... .

If we ever have three occurences of gfc_typename in a function list,
like

   foo (gfc_typename(a), gfc_typename(b), gfc_typename(c));

we will get the wrong result for the third one.  We will also get
a wrong result for

   pa =3D gfc_typename(a);
   pb =3D gfc_typename(b);
   pc =3D gfc_typename(c);

because then pa will point to the same memory as pc.=