This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: segfaults in libgfortran
- From: "François-Xavier Coudert" <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>
- To: "Daniel Franke" <franke dot daniel at gmail dot com>
- Cc: fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 12:39:53 +0100
- Subject: Re: segfaults in libgfortran
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=YLeawxTCnCmnA33aZsSuXC2UFeTLI27FhCNkL1/l1VcMJ6oLvfWAZvhEevL0Iboe/FDWN0EVnMwgd18AmYhJUBchg8ssDyAZP99nr3kpv3XvHr7F8SFcp4aXt7xMeXxnOM+EkUaKZEZ7YKMY/C7c/yVM9wcaCasK4JyMfbrSXgY=
- References: <640ad44b0701240310h772f1e1an398bac31f5dbaa2a@mail.gmail.com>
For example
WRITE(*, FMT="(' #elements:', I2)") p%data%graph%nused
segfaults if one of the pointer components of p%data%graph%nused is
not associated, graph in this case (libgfortran/io/write.c:158,
extract_int).
I think it's not specific to libgfortran. Whatever you might do with
p%data%graph%nused in this case, you're exposing yourself to a
segfault (although it is impredictable by nature).
So, I'd say it's not considered a bug. But others might have a
different opinion, so let's hear from them.
FX