g77 assumed array patch [was: fortran regression]

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < 19971215230724.05958@dot.cygnus.com >you write:
  > > my suggestion -- it's a trivial change in the g77 front end,
  > > but if someone can implement the back-end changes to cope with
  > > a NULL_TREE in the "upper" part of a build_range_type call.
  > 
  > The following patch implements this suggestion.
  > 
  > It compiles the null test case
  > 
  >       subroutine star(aap, noot)                
  >       dimension aap(*)                                        
  >       end                                       
[ ... ]

  > Mon Dec 15 22:46:19 1997  Richard Henderson  <rth@cygnus.com>
  > 
  > 	G77 ChangeLog:
  > 	* com.c (ffecom_sym_transform_): Assumed arrays have no upper bound.
  > 
  > 	GCC ChangeLog:
  > 	* tree.c (build_range_type): Allow creation of ranges with no maximum.
  > 	* dbxout.c (dbxout_range_type): Handle missing TYPE_MAX_VALUE.
  > 	* dwarf2out.c (add_subscript_info): Likewise.
  > 	* dwarfout.c (subscript_data_attribute, byte_size_attribute): Likewise.
  > 	* sdbout.c (plain_type_1): Likewise.
  > 	* stmt.c (pushcase_range, all_cases_count, node_has_high_bound):
  > 	Likewise.
  > 	* fold-const.c (int_const_binop, fold_convert, make_range, fold):
  > 	Likewise.
THanks.  I went ahead and installed this patch.  If we're missing a case
I'm sure we'll find out soon enough.

I do worry a little about the "hope debuggers can deal" issues with
an unspecified high bound.  Maybe we should set an artificial one if
some debuggers don't handle unspecified bounds correctly.

jeff