Bug report gcc 4.8

[W Spector]

Dear gfortraners,

Has there been any progress on PR 34640 lately?  Today I updated my 
trunk version of gfortran to version 6.0.0 20150613, and it still SEGVs 
- just like it has for years.  Test program below.

It was noted a year or two ago that there was a dev branch that had 
fixes in this area.  Perhaps we should try it instead?

Your advice is appreciated.

Walter

program test_pointers

   implicit none
   integer :: i, ndata
   type data_t
      real :: x
   end type data_t
   type(data_t), allocatable, target :: data(:)

   type data_pointer_t
      real, pointer :: p_x(:)
   end type data_pointer_t
   type(data_pointer_t) :: data_pointer

   ndata = 10
   allocate(data(ndata))
   forall(i=1:ndata) data(i)%x = float(i)

   data_pointer%p_x => data%x
   write(*,*) data_pointer%p_x

end program test_pointers

>     From: Walter Spector <w6ws at earthlink dot net>
>     To: Paul Richard Thomas <paul dot richard dot thomas at gmail dot com>
>     Cc: gfortran <fortran at gcc dot gnu dot org>
>     Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 07:38:01 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
>     Subject: Re: Bug report gcc 4.8
>     Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
>     Reply-to: Walter Spector <w6ws at earthlink dot net>
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> Thank you for the update.  Since this seems to be the only remaining F90/F95 issue
> in gfortran, it is great to hear that it is finally getting some attention.  As soon
> as you have something in the trunk, I will be happy to test it and get him up
> and running with it.
>
> Please realize that a lot of us 'users' of gfortran greatly appreciate the gfortran
> teams efforts!  If I didn't, I wouldn't be reporting the bugs I encounter and advocating
> for their repair.
>
> Walter
>
> -----Original Message-----
>>From: Paul Richard Thomas <paul.richard.thomas@gmail.com>
>>Sent: Jun 9, 2014 12:40 PM
>>To: W Spector <w6ws@earthlink.net>
>>Cc: gfortran <fortran@gcc.gnu.org>
>>Subject: Re: Bug report gcc 4.8
>>
>>Dear Walter,
>>
>>We are putting such effort as we can into the array descriptor reform.
>>This has to happen for a variety of reasons, including fixing the
>>likes of Dr Brown's testscase. We have made enormous strides in this
>>area. Most particularly, the branch devoted to this work, fortran-dev,
>>now functions like 4.10/4.9 up to a couple of missed vectorization
>>opportunities in the testsuite. We are aiming to merge 4.10 and this
>>development branch as soon as possible, so that the API changes occur
>>early in the release cycle. Just today, we have had some email
>>exchanges on the mailing list where we summarise what is to be done
>>and, I hope, we will fix who does what to get to the point of a merge
>>asap.
>>
>>With best regards
>>
>>Paul
>>
>>On 9 June 2014 17:43, W Spector <w6ws@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>> Unfortunately Dr Browns recent thread got off on a wrong track, but the
>>> problem remains.  I am still not convinced that this ICE requires a change
>>> to the array descriptors.
>