Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR 86935: Bad locus in ASSOCIATE statement

[Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep.dot.nop@gmail.com>]

AFAICS current trunk still has this issue.
Any takers?
thanks,

On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 17:16:07 +0200
Bernhard Reutner-Fischer <rep.dot.nop@gmail.com> wrote:

>                                                i spotted one
> (pre-existing) possible inconsistency that i did overlook back then:
> 
> gfc_match_associate () reads
> ...
>       if (gfc_match (" %e", &newAssoc->target) != MATCH_YES)
>         {
>           /* Have another go, allowing for procedure pointer selectors.  */
>           gfc_matching_procptr_assignment = 1;
>           if (gfc_match (" %e", &newAssoc->target) != MATCH_YES)
>             {
>               gfc_error ("Invalid association target at %C");
>               goto assocListError;
>             }
>           gfc_matching_procptr_assignment = 0;
>         }
> 
> i.e. we retry a match, but in the second attempt we turn on procptr
> assignment matching and if that works, we turn procptr assignment
> matching off again.
> But if we fail that retry, we forget to turn it off again.
> I suppose we should:
> 
> $ svn diff -x -p gcc/fortran/match.c
> Index: gcc/fortran/match.c
> ===================================================================
> --- gcc/fortran/match.c (revision 264040)
> +++ gcc/fortran/match.c (working copy)
> @@ -1898,13 +1898,16 @@ gfc_match_associate (void)
>        if (gfc_match (" %e", &newAssoc->target) != MATCH_YES)
>   {
>     /* Have another go, allowing for procedure pointer selectors.  */
> +   match m;
> +
>     gfc_matching_procptr_assignment = 1;
> -   if (gfc_match (" %e", &newAssoc->target) != MATCH_YES)
> +   m = gfc_match (" %e", &newAssoc->target);
> +   gfc_matching_procptr_assignment = 0;
> +   if (m != MATCH_YES)
>       {
>         gfc_error ("Invalid association target at %C");
>         goto assocListError;
>       }
> -   gfc_matching_procptr_assignment = 0;
>   }
>        newAssoc->where = gfc_current_locus;
> 
> 
> Untested. Maybe someone wants to give it a whirl...
> If it wrecks havoc then leaving it set deliberately deserves at least a comment.
> 
> PS: It would be nice to get rid of gfc_matching_procptr_assignment,
> gfc_matching_ptr_assignment, gfc_matching_prefix, FWIW.
> cheers,
> >
> > Thanks everyone!
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Janus