Re: [PATCH, v2] Fortran: error recovery for invalid types in array constructors [PR107000]

[Mikael Morin <morin-mikael@orange.fr>]

Le 07/10/2022 à 20:46, Harald Anlauf a écrit :
> 
> OK, that is because reduce_binary dispatches the reduce_binary_*.
> We could move the check from reduce_binary_aa to the beginning of
> reduce_binary, as with the following change on top of the patch:
> 
> diff --git a/gcc/fortran/arith.cc b/gcc/fortran/arith.cc
> index 2c57c796270..91e70655ad3 100644
> --- a/gcc/fortran/arith.cc
> +++ b/gcc/fortran/arith.cc
> @@ -1426,10 +1426,6 @@ reduce_binary_aa (arith (*eval) (gfc_expr *,
> gfc_expr *, gfc_expr **),
>     if (!gfc_check_conformance (op1, op2, _("elemental binary operation")))
>       return ARITH_INCOMMENSURATE;
> 
> -  if ((op1->expr_type == EXPR_OP && op1->ts.type == BT_UNKNOWN)
> -      || (op2->expr_type == EXPR_OP && op2->ts.type == BT_UNKNOWN))
> -    return ARITH_INVALID_TYPE;
> -
>     head = gfc_constructor_copy (op1->value.constructor);
>     for (c = gfc_constructor_first (head),
>          d = gfc_constructor_first (op2->value.constructor);
> @@ -1467,6 +1463,10 @@ static arith
>   reduce_binary (arith (*eval) (gfc_expr *, gfc_expr *, gfc_expr **),
>                 gfc_expr *op1, gfc_expr *op2, gfc_expr **result)
>   {
> +  if ((op1->expr_type == EXPR_OP && op1->ts.type == BT_UNKNOWN)
> +      || (op2->expr_type == EXPR_OP && op2->ts.type == BT_UNKNOWN))
> +    return ARITH_INVALID_TYPE;
> +
>     if (op1->expr_type == EXPR_CONSTANT && op2->expr_type == EXPR_CONSTANT)
>       return eval (op1, op2, result);
> 
> However, we cannot remove the checks from reduce_binary_ac
> or reduce_binary_ca, as the lengthy testcase proves...
> 
> Do you like the above better?
> 
Yes, definitely, but some less important weirdness remains;
the scalar vs array function catches scalar vs invalid scalar cases.
Let me have a look.