Hi Mikael,

> > @@ -7030,7 +7053,8 @@ gfc_trans_subcomponent_assign (tree dest,
> > gfc_component * cm, gfc_expr * expr, gfc_add_expr_to_block (&block, tmp);
> >      }
> >    else if (init && (cm->attr.allocatable
> > -	   || (cm->ts.type == BT_CLASS && CLASS_DATA
> > (cm)->attr.allocatable)))
> > +	   || (cm->ts.type == BT_CLASS && CLASS_DATA (cm)->attr.allocatable
> > +	       && expr->ts.type != BT_CLASS)))
> >      {
> >        /* Take care about non-array allocatable components here.  The
> > alloc_* routine below is motivated by the alloc_scalar_allocatable_for_
> > @@ -7074,6 +7098,14 @@ gfc_trans_subcomponent_assign (tree dest,
> > gfc_component * cm, gfc_expr * expr, tmp = gfc_build_memcpy_call (tmp,
> > se.expr, size); gfc_add_expr_to_block (&block, tmp);
> >  	}
> > +      else if (cm->ts.type == BT_CLASS && expr->ts.type == BT_CLASS)
> > +	{
> > +	  tmp = gfc_copy_class_to_class (se.expr, dest, integer_one_node,
> > +				   CLASS_DATA
> > (cm)->attr.unlimited_polymorphic);
> > +	  gfc_add_expr_to_block (&block, tmp);
> > +	  gfc_add_modify (&block, gfc_class_vptr_get (dest),
> > +			  gfc_class_vptr_get (se.expr));
> > +	}
> >        else
> >  	gfc_add_modify (&block, tmp,
> >  			fold_convert (TREE_TYPE (tmp), se.expr));
> But this hunk is canceled by the one before, isn't it?
> I mean, If the condition here is true, the condition before was false?

You are absolutely right. The second hunk is dead code and removed in the
attached patch. That must have been the first attempt to address the issue and
later on I did not perceive that it was useless. Sorry for that.

Regards,
	Andre
-- 
Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de