This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug fortran/51605] internal compiler error gfc_trans_block_construct, at fortran/trans-stmt.c:984
- From: "burnus at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:39:55 +0000
- Subject: [Bug fortran/51605] internal compiler error gfc_trans_block_construct, at fortran/trans-stmt.c:984
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-51605-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51605
--- Comment #8 from Tobias Burnus <burnus at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-12-19 11:39:55 UTC ---
Created attachment 26139
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26139
Draft patch (for the rejects-valid part, not for the ICE)
Draft patch, which allows again
ptr => associate-name
It also fixes an ICE ("class_ok" part, "(a)") and issues with coarrays and
select type. [Coarrays now fail after resolution with an ICE.]
Test cases (a) to (d):
type t
end type t
class(t), target :: p1 ! (a) Invalid (was ICEing before)
!class(t), allocatable, target :: p1 ! (b) Valid (unchanged by the patch)
!class(t), allocatable :: p1 ! (c) Correctly fails (ditto)
!class(t), pointer :: p1 ! (d) Valid (now accepted)
class(t), pointer :: p2
select type(p1)
type is(t)
p2 => p1
class is(t)
p2 => p1
end select
end
* * *
Having fixed the rejects-valid issue, one again hits:
internal compiler error: in gfc_trans_block_construct, at
fortran/trans-stmt.c:1215
1209 ns = code->ext.block.ns;
1211 sym = ns->proc_name;
1215 gcc_assert (!sym->tlink);
Here, "sym->name" is "eval_int_expr" and sym->tlink == sym.
The issue is seemingly the following code in an internal procedure:
integer_or_logical: select type(symbol_ptr)
...
end select integer_or_logical
and then another internal procedure:
subroutine integer_or_logical( expr_str, flag)
...
end subroutine integer_or_logical
recursive subroutine eval_int_expr( int_expr, value)
The label "integer_or_logical" of the block some clashes with the same-named
subroutine - and thus marks the subroutine which follows somehow as
EXPR_BLOCK?!?