This is the mail archive of the fortran@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [Patch, fortran] PR29451 - Fortran runtime error: Attempt to allocate a negative amount of memory...]


Steve and FX

The above patch regtested cleanly on a tree that pre-dated FX's bounds patch. However, in regtesting prior to commit, I ran into a failure because the second ubound of 'soda' in the submitted testcase, negative_automatic_size.f90, was being returned as zero. Other compilers do not do this to the ubound of an automatic array and return the given values instead.

Looking further, I find that

 print *, ubound (soda, 1), ubound (soda, 2)
 print *, ubound (soda)

outputs on the first call to the procedure:

          0           2
          0           0

So, I think something is not right with the vector version of ubound for this case.

Since I am convinced that this patch is doing the right thing, I have replaced

if (.not.any(lbound (soda) <= ubound (soda))) call abort ()

with what should be the equivalent

 if ((lbound (soda, 1) > ubound (soda, 1)) .and. &
     (lbound (soda, 2) > ubound (soda, 2))) call abort ()

All the best

Paul


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]