From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 63757 invoked by alias); 28 Mar 2015 14:50:40 -0000 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 Received: (qmail 63738 invoked by uid 89); 28 Mar 2015 14:50:39 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: troutmask.apl.washington.edu Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (HELO troutmask.apl.washington.edu) (128.95.76.21) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:50:38 +0000 Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t2SEoaVj007346 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 28 Mar 2015 07:50:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) id t2SEoa1F007345; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 07:50:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 14:50:00 -0000 From: Steve Kargl To: "Dominique d'Humi?res" Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, fortran@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] fortran/65429 -- don't dereference a null pointer Message-ID: <20150328145036.GA7309@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <20150328000157.70A50105@mailhost.lps.ens.fr> <20150328003313.GA4777@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <945470A5-15E1-4166-80F5-181A5A5EBCBD@lps.ens.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <945470A5-15E1-4166-80F5-181A5A5EBCBD@lps.ens.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-SW-Source: 2015-03/txt/msg01484.txt.bz2 >> 28 mars 2015, 01:33, Steve Kargl : >> >> On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 01:01:57AM +0100, Dominique Dhumieres wrote: >>> >>> AFAICT your test succeeds without your patch and does not test that the ICE >>> reported by FX is gone (indeed it is with your patch). >>> >> >> Yeah, I thought about that, but did not pursue it, yet. >> It is a zero-size string issue because FX's initialization >> is empty. I'll play a little bit tomorrow with the >> testcase case. > On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 12:42:29PM +0100, Dominique d'Humi?res wrote: > See also my comment 2 in pr65429. > > Cheers, > > Dominique Can one do anything useful with a zero-sized array of strings where the length of a non-existent element of the array is nonzero? -- Steve