This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC 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: [gfortran] Patch Ping**2

From: Tobias Schlüter <tobias dot schlueter at physik dot uni-muenchen dot de>
To: Paul Thomas <Paul dot Thomas at jet dot efda dot org>
Cc: "'fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>,"'gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org'" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>,'Steve Kargl' <sgk at troutmask dot apl dot washington dot edu>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:53:02 +0200
Subject: Re: [gfortran] Patch Ping**2
References: <B849B0C2C1873A44A76FA08A26885A367298BD@ntsrv-privmail.jet.uk> <42AB9E7F.2030400@physik.uni-muenchen.de> <42AC44EE.4090805@physik.uni-muenchen.de>

Tobias Schlüter wrote:
> Tobias Schlüter wrote:
>>I jsut got back home, and my build / testsuite run has finished.  Alas, I'm
>>seeing a bug deep in the innards of the compiler in one of my new testcases:
>>the tree-checking phase complains.  I'll have a look at this tomorrow.
> 
> 
> This turned out to be a gimplifier bug, now PR22035.  Something as simple as
>    COMPLEX z, w
>    z = (1.,2.)
>    if (z/=w) call abort
>    end
> ICEs on the mainline currently.
> 
> I will commit the patch and the other testcase to the mainline, and the patch
> together with both patches to the 4.0 branch.  The testcase which is broken
> will have to wait for the above bug -- which is completely unrelated, except
> that it happened to appear in this testcase -- to get fixed.

The testcase is now on the mainline as well.

- Tobi

References:
- Re:[gfortran] Patch Ping**2
  - From: Paul Thomas
- Re: [gfortran] Patch Ping**2
  - From: Tobias Schlüter
- Re: [gfortran] Patch Ping**2
  - From: Tobias Schlüter

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