This is the mail archive of the
fortran@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.
Re: [Patch, fortran] PR59198 - [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] ICE on cyclically dependent polymorphic types
- From: Paul Richard Thomas <paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com>
- To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Tobias Burnus <tobias dot burnus at physik dot fu-berlin dot de>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org" <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Janus Weil <janus at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Juergen Reuter <juergen dot reuter at physik dot uni-freiburg dot de>
- Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 22:10:24 +0100
- Subject: Re: [Patch, fortran] PR59198 - [4.8/4.9/5 Regression] ICE on cyclically dependent polymorphic types
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20150316080738 dot GA17064 at physik dot fu-berlin dot de> <CAGkQGiK4eziF1kekZ5u4tw-ySZxGFZ+uV6xQSrmrUNhhzPnKFQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAGkQGi++AZQD0q5wcQRUnAzTVWh5evE9=W3XpJWjvzJJYBi6jg at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150317173247 dot GC1746 at tucnak dot redhat dot com>
Oh bother! Thanks Jakub - I did wonder about that but thought that the
same function would yield the same result :-(
Thanks. I will put it right.
Paul
On 17 March 2015 at 18:32, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 06:28:03AM +0100, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
>> Dear Tobias,
>>
>> As far as I can see, without the patch, gfc_get _derived_type goes
>> into a continuous loop trying to build the abstract type. Why this is
>> not the case with an additional non-procedure pointer component, I do
>> not know. I suspect that there is a corner case out there that will
>> challenge this patch but I was unable to generate it. I decided
>> therefore to commit, with an additional condition in the loop to
>> prevent repeated attempts to build the component field.
>>
>> Committed to trunk as revision 221474.
>
> Note, the proc_ptr_comp_45.f90 testcase fails on i686-linux (unless -mfpmath=sse -msse2
> or -ffloat-store) even at -O0, cos (1.570796327) is folded into constant and the runtime
> function doesn't return exactly the same result, because of extended
> precision.
> So, either you should allow a few ulps epsilon, or use some other function
> where you get reasonably exact result.
>
> Jakub
--
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's
too dark to read.
Groucho Marx