From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20846 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 2010 18:19:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 20829 invoked by uid 22791); 4 Dec 2010 18:19:04 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (HELO troutmask.apl.washington.edu) (128.208.78.105) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 04 Dec 2010 18:18:58 +0000 Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost.apl.washington.edu [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oB4IIriY061120; Sat, 4 Dec 2010 10:18:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id oB4IIpxt061119; Sat, 4 Dec 2010 10:18:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 18:19:00 -0000 From: Steve Kargl To: Daniel Kraft Cc: Tobias Burnus , Fortran List , gcc-patches Subject: Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR fortran/46794: Fix ICE with powers of integers Message-ID: <20101204181851.GA61037@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <4CF97314.4000206@domob.eu> <4CFA00A1.6020101@net-b.de> <4CFA0B54.5090101@domob.eu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4CFA0B54.5090101@domob.eu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-12/txt/msg00383.txt.bz2 On Sat, Dec 04, 2010 at 10:35:16AM +0100, Daniel Kraft wrote: > Hi Tobias, > > Tobias Burnus wrote: > >>Regression-tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu without failures -- > >>though the run somehow looked strange to me (on the compile-farm); > >>I'll try again to be sure. Ok for trunk? > > > >OK for the trunk. Can you check whether one needs to likewise for the > >4.5 and 4.4 branch? (I think one should check on source level - the > >verify_tree might not always catch it. For some reasons, it ICEs here > >with 4.4 and 4.6 but not with 4.5; however, I think that's rather by > >chance and not because of a proper casting.) > > No further problems with the regtest, thanks for the review! I > committed as rev. 167453 to trunk. I will look at the source for 4.4 > and 4.5 accordingly. > Can you fix the test case to be valid Fortran. k1 and k2 are used uninitialized. -- Steve