When I compile the module listed below using the September 6 snapshot version of gfortran, I get the following message: c.f90: In function 'local_cum_nc_chisq': c.f90:15: internal compiler error: in gfc_finish_var_decl, at fortran/trans-decl.c:510 Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source if appropriate. See <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> for instructions. MODULE cdf_nc_chisq_mod PUBLIC TYPE :: one_parameter INTEGER :: high_bound END TYPE one_parameter TYPE :: the_distribution TYPE (one_parameter) :: parameters(1) END TYPE the_distribution TYPE (the_distribution), PARAMETER :: the_chi_square = & the_distribution((/( one_parameter(0))/)) CONTAINS SUBROUTINE local_cum_nc_chisq() df0 = the_chi_square%parameters(1)%high_bound END SUBROUTINE local_cum_nc_chisq END MODULE cdf_nc_chisq_mod
Confirmed. Backtrace: (gdb) b fancy_abort Breakpoint 1 at 0x817cfe0: file ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/diagnostic.c, line 654. (gdb) r mm.f90 Starting program: /home/ig25/libexec/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.3.0/f951 mm.f90 local_cum_nc_chisq Breakpoint 1, fancy_abort (file=0x876a8e4 "../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c", line=510, function=0x876adf0 "gfc_finish_var_decl") at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/diagnostic.c:654 654 { (gdb) up #1 0x080e0cf1 in gfc_finish_var_decl (decl=0xb7b1d05c, sym=0x8926b58) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c:510 510 gcc_assert (current_function_decl == NULL_TREE || sym->result == sym); (gdb) p current_function_decl $1 = (tree) 0xb7b1c180 (gdb) p *sym $2 = {name = 0x892554c "the_chi_square", module = 0x89254f5 "cdf_nc_chisq_mod", declared_at = {nextc = 0x88d7336 " = &", lb = 0x88d72f0}, ts = {type = BT_DERIVED, kind = 0, derived = 0x8926790, cl = 0x0, is_c_interop = 0, is_iso_c = 0, f90_type = BT_DERIVED}, attr = {allocatable = 0, dimension = 0, external = 0, intrinsic = 0, optional = 0, pointer = 0, target = 0, value = 0, volatile_ = 0, dummy = 0, result = 0, assign = 0, threadprivate = 0, not_always_present = 0, implied_index = 0, save = SAVE_IMPLICIT, data = 0, protected = 0, use_assoc = 0, use_only = 0, imported = 0, in_namelist = 0, in_common = 0, in_equivalence = 0, function = 0, subroutine = 0, procedure = 0, generic = 0, generic_copy = 0, implicit_type = 0, untyped = 0, is_bind_c = 0, is_c_interop = 0, is_iso_c = 0, sequence = 0, elemental = 0, pure = 0, recursive = 0, unmaskable = 0, masked = 0, contained = 0, mod_proc = 0, abstract = 0, noreturn = 0, entry = 0, entry_master = 0, mixed_entry_master = 0, always_explicit = 0, referenced = 1, ambiguous_interfaces = 0, is_main_program = 0, access = ACCESS_UNKNOWN, intent = INTENT_UNKNOWN, flavor = FL_PARAMETER, if_source = IFSRC_UNKNOWN, proc = PROC_UNKNOWN, cray_pointer = 0, cray_pointee = 0, alloc_comp = 0, pointer_comp = 0, private_comp = 0, volatile_ns = 0x0}, generic = 0x0, component_access = ACCESS_UNKNOWN, formal = 0x0, formal_ns = 0x0, value = 0x8927410, as = 0x0, result = 0x0, components = 0x0, interface = 0x0, cp_pointer = 0x0, common_next = 0x0, common_head = 0x0, dummy_order = 0, entry_id = 0, namelist = 0x0, namelist_tail = 0x0, old_symbol = 0x0, tlink = 0x0, mark = 1, new = 0, equiv_built = 0, forall_index = 0, refs = 1, ns = 0x8925f68, backend_decl = 0x0, from_intmod = INTMOD_NONE, intmod_sym_id = 0, binding_label = '\0' <repeats 126 times>, common_block = 0x0} (gdb) p sym->result $3 = (struct gfc_symbol *) 0x0 (gdb) bt #0 fancy_abort (file=0x876a8e4 "../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c", line=510, function=0x876adf0 "gfc_finish_var_decl") at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/diagnostic.c:654 #1 0x080e0cf1 in gfc_finish_var_decl (decl=0xb7b1d05c, sym=0x8926b58) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c:510 #2 0x080dfc1c in gfc_get_symbol_decl (sym=0x8926b58) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c:995 #3 0x080e8365 in gfc_conv_variable (se=0xbff0ec34, expr=0x89275a8) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c:404 #4 0x080e5821 in gfc_conv_expr (se=0xbff0ec34, expr=0x89275a8) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c:3292 #5 0x080e7af3 in gfc_conv_expr_val (se=0xbff0ec34, expr=0xb7b1c180) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c:3337 #6 0x080ea8c6 in gfc_conv_intrinsic_function_args (se=0xbff0f04c, expr=<value optimized out>, argarray=0xbff0ec80, nargs=1) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:209 #7 0x080ebe54 in gfc_conv_intrinsic_conversion (se=0xbff0f04c, expr=0x8927d78) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:267 #8 0x080f2a89 in gfc_conv_intrinsic_function (se=0xbff0f04c, expr=0x8927d78) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-intrinsic.c:3820 #9 0x080e5147 in gfc_conv_function_expr (se=0xbff0f04c, expr=0xb7b1d05c) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c:2809 #10 0x080e5846 in gfc_conv_expr (se=0xbff0f04c, expr=0x8927d78) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c:3284 #11 0x080e688a in gfc_trans_assignment_1 (expr1=0x8927210, expr2=0x8927d78, init_flag=0 '\0') at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c:4001 #12 0x080e6a55 in gfc_trans_assignment (expr1=0x8927210, expr2=0x8927d78, init_flag=32 ' ') at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c:4152 #13 0x080e77b1 in gfc_trans_assign (code=0x8927280) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-expr.c:4164 #14 0x080c7512 in gfc_trans_code (code=0x8927280) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans.c:970 #15 0x080de492 in gfc_generate_function_code (ns=0x8927698) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c:3258 #16 0x080c498a in gfc_generate_module_code (ns=0x8925f68) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/trans.c:1190 #17 0x080991c6 in gfc_parse_file () at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/parse.c:3316 #18 0x080c023d in gfc_be_parse_file (set_yydebug=0) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/fortran/f95-lang.c:300 #19 0x08344908 in toplev_main (argc=2, argv=0xbff0f4c4) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/toplev.c:1045 #20 0x08108ccf in main (argc=Cannot access memory at address 0x20 ) at ../../../gcc/trunk/gcc/main.c:35
Michael, I answered my own question to you - it is indeed a regression. Cheers Paul
As the guilty party, I had better take this on. Paul
(In reply to comment #3) > As the guilty party, I had better take this on. > > Paul > The patch has been posted on the list. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2007-09/msg00378.html Paul
Subject: Bug 33337 Author: pault Date: Sat Sep 22 15:46:41 2007 New Revision: 128672 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=128672 Log: 2007-09-22 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org> PR fortran/33337 PR fortran/33376 * trans-decl.c (gfc_create_module_variable): Output derived type parameters. * arith.c (gfc_parentheses): Return the argument if it is a constant expression. * primary.c (gfc_match_rvalue): Remove the clearing of the module name and the use_assoc attribute for derived type parameter expressions. 2007-09-22 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org> PR fortran/33337 * gfortran.dg/derived_comp_array_ref_3.f90: New test. PR fortran/33376 * gfortran.dg/derived_comp_array_ref_4.f90: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/derived_comp_array_ref_3.f90 trunk/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/derived_comp_array_ref_4.f90 Modified: trunk/gcc/fortran/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/fortran/arith.c trunk/gcc/fortran/primary.c trunk/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
Fixed on trunk. Thanks for bearing with me, Michael. Paul
Subject: Bug number PR33337 A patch for this bug has been added to the patch tracker. The mailing list url for the patch is http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-09/msg01712.html