[Bug fortran/29391] LBOUND(TRANSPOSE(I)) doesn't work

["fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

------- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-10-10 07:31 -------
For the TRANSPOSE case, the generated code shows that the {u,l}bounds simply
aren't set right:

$ cat pr29391.f90
  integer :: i(-1:1,-1:1)=0, j(2)
  j = lbound(transpose(i)) 
end
$ cat pr29391.f90.003t.original 
MAIN__ ()
{
  int4 j[2];
  static int4 i[9] = {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0};

  _gfortran_set_std (70, 127, 0);
  {
    int8 S.0;

    S.0 = 1;
    while (1)
      {
        if (S.0 > 2) goto L.1; else (void) 0;
        {
          struct array2_int4 atmp.2;
          struct array2_int4 parm.1;

          parm.1.dtype = 266;
          parm.1.dim[0].lbound = -1;
          parm.1.dim[0].ubound = 1;
          parm.1.dim[0].stride = 1;
          parm.1.dim[1].lbound = -1;
          parm.1.dim[1].ubound = 1;
          parm.1.dim[1].stride = 3;
          parm.1.data = (void *) &i[0];
          parm.1.offset = 0;
          atmp.2.dtype = parm.1.dtype;
          atmp.2.dim[0].stride = parm.1.dim[1].stride;
          atmp.2.dim[0].lbound = parm.1.dim[1].lbound;
          atmp.2.dim[0].ubound = parm.1.dim[1].ubound;
          atmp.2.dim[1].stride = parm.1.dim[0].stride;
          atmp.2.dim[1].lbound = parm.1.dim[0].lbound;
          atmp.2.dim[1].ubound = parm.1.dim[0].ubound;
          atmp.2.data = parm.1.data;
          atmp.2.offset = parm.1.offset;
          j[NON_LVALUE_EXPR <S.0> + -1] = (int4) atmp.2.dim[S.0 - 1].lbound;
        }
        S.0 = S.0 + 1;
      }
    L.1:;
  }
}

The following patch ought to fix it:

Index: gcc/fortran/trans-array.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/fortran/trans-array.c   (revision 117560)
+++ gcc/fortran/trans-array.c   (working copy)
@@ -787,11 +787,17 @@

       gfc_add_modify_expr (&se->pre,
                           gfc_conv_descriptor_lbound (dest, dest_index),
-                          gfc_conv_descriptor_lbound (src, src_index));
+                          gfc_index_one_node);

       gfc_add_modify_expr (&se->pre,
                           gfc_conv_descriptor_ubound (dest, dest_index),
-                          gfc_conv_descriptor_ubound (src, src_index));
+                          build2 (PLUS_EXPR, gfc_array_index_type,
+                                  gfc_index_one_node,
+                                  build2 (MINUS_EXPR, gfc_array_index_type,
+                                          gfc_conv_descriptor_ubound
+                                            (src, src_index),
+                                          gfc_conv_descriptor_lbound
+                                            (src, src_index))));

       if (!loop->to[n])
         {


One last comment: I'm not sure the stride shouldn't be set to one. The patch
above regtests fine, and can compile correctly everything I threw at it, but
maybe I have not been clever enough to think of something that would trigger a
check on the stride.

Paul, could I have your opinion on the patch and the stride question? After you
comment, I'll go on designing patches for the other functions.


-- 

fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |paulthomas2 at wanadoo dot
                   |                            |fr
      Known to fail|                            |4.2.0 4.1.2


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29391