[Bug fortran/45586] [4.8 Regression] ICE non-trivial conversion at assignment

["rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45586

--- Comment #74 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2012-07-30 12:33:01 UTC ---
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012, mikael at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45586
> 
> --- Comment #73 from Mikael Morin <mikael at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-07-30 12:29:33 UTC ---
> (In reply to comment #72)
> > > (In reply to comment #63)
> > > > That's bogus as TYPE_FIELDS
> > > > is supposed to be shared amongst variant types.
> > > 
> > > Then we'll have to revert Micha's recursive restrict work.
> > 
> > I don't think so, it merely has to be fixed.
> How so? by making it non-recursive?
> For variable to be type compatible for assignment, they shall be variants of
> the same type, and thus have the same TYPE_FIELDS.
> If they shall have the same TYPE_FIELDS, they shall have the same components,
> the same components have the same types, so that one cannot be restrict
> qualified.

The types should not be variant types ;)  (see my hack patch in
this or another bug)

> > > Is it possible for the front-end to specify alias sets by hand (I mean without
> > > relying on the middle-end computing them based on types etc)?
> > 
> > Yes.  But that does not work with LTO,
> You mean calling the front-end's code does not work at LTO time or the alias
> sets are not saved/restored for LTO?

LTO re-computes alias-sets based on types.

> > nor does it address the original
> > issue of supporting INTENT IN/OUT properly.
> Ah? Isn't a restricted type variable (resp. component, etc) merely one that has
> its own alias set? So if it works with restrict, it works with alias sets?

No, alias-sets and restrict are different beasts.  It's important to
have the data member restrict qualified for INTENT IN/OUT.