Re: [Patch, Fortran] PR 57022: [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression] Inappropriate warning for use of TRANSFER with arrays

[Tobias Burnus <burnus at net-b dot de>]

Am 22.04.2013 20:00, schrieb Janus Weil:
> > >Side remark and just for completeness, there is also rank == -1 for
> > >assumed-rank arrays. However, as TRANSFER is not an inquiry function, it
> > >shouldn't reach that code. (Maybe you could quickly check that that's indeed
> > >the case.)
> well, I guess you*can*  actually reach that code with assumed-rank
> arrays, e.g. via
>
> subroutine assumed_rank (a)
>    integer, intent(in) :: a(..)
>    integer :: c(1:4)
>    c = transfer(a,c,4)
> end subroutine
>
> So, good point! The code part quoted above has been removed in the
> last revision, but I have updated gfc_target_expr_size to check for
> "(e->rank)" now (i.e. without the "> 0"), and I have also added the
> above test case (which indeed showed the false warning with the last
> version of the patch, but not any more).

Checking for "rank" instead of "rank >0" is fine - but I wouldn't add 
the test case as it is invalid - and gfortran should reject the code 
according to the following TS29113 constraint:

"C535b An assumed-rank variable name shall not appear in a designator or 
expression except as an actual argument corresponding to a dummy 
argument that is assumed-rank, the argument of the C_LOC function in the 
ISO_C_BINDING intrinsic module, or the first argument in a reference to 
an intrinsic inquiry function."

Seemingly, the constraint code is not correctly checked for intrinsics 
as TRANSFER is a transformational function.

I wonder whether TYPE(*) and !GCC$ attributes no_arg_check have the same 
problems as similar constraints exist for those.

I have now filled: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=57035

Tobias