[commited, Patch, Fortran, PR58586, v5] ICE with derived type with allocatable component passed by value

[Andre Vehreschild]

Hi Steve, hi Paul, hi all,

Steve and Paul, thank you very much for the reviews. Committed with the
requested changes as r225447 and r225448. The last commit adds the Changelog
entry in the testsuite I forgot. Sorry for that.

For the open issue in the testcase I have opened the pr:

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66775

Regards,
	Andre

On Sun, 5 Jul 2015 19:48:13 +0200
Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.thomas@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Andre,
> 
> I agree with Steve's recommendation that you comment out the line and
> open a PR for the problem.
> 
> The patch looks fine to me and applied cleanly, apart from trailing
> CRs in the testcases.
> 
> OK by me too.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Paul
> 
> PS I felt safe in setting a deadline for the submodule patch because:
> (i) It was obvious that nobody would review it because of its size;
> and (ii) It is safely ring-fenced by the need for very specific
> procedure attributes and declarations. I would not dream of doing the
> same for other patches more integrated in parts of the compiler that
> are frequented by commonly used code. For example, the patch to
> encompass the use of private entities with submodules will be just
> such a patch.... when I figure out how to do it! I can sympathize with
> you though; you have often had to wait an excessively long time for
> reviews.
> 
> 
> On 5 July 2015 at 18:14, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 04, 2015 at 09:20:39PM +0200, Andre Vehreschild wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks for looking at the code. The error you experience is known
> >> to me. The bug is present in gfortran and only exposed by this patch.
> >> Unfortunately is the pr58586 not addressing this specific error. It
> >> may be in the bugtracker under a different number already. Furthermore
> >> did I not want to extend the patch for 58586 any further, because I
> >> have learned that the more complicated a patch gets the longer review
> >> takes. For making the testcase run fine we also simply can comment the
> >> line.
> >>
> >
> > I can appreciate the problem of fixing one bug may expose another,
> > and I agree that holding up a patch for 58586 due to a latent bug
> > seems unreasonable.  I reviewed the email history and it appears
> > that you've addressed Mikael's concerns.  My only comment would
> > be to comment out the problematic statement in alloc_comp_class_4.f03,
> > and open a new bug report to record the issue.  Ok to commit with
> > my suggested change.
> >
> > --
> > Steve
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Andre Vehreschild * Email: vehre ad gmx dot de 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: submit.diff
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 11376 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/fortran/attachments/20150706/3e998ec7/attachment.bin>