| Message ID | e73dfda9-a156-af6c-9696-8dc99865b2d6@net-b.de |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [committed,Fortran] PR68020 – Fix implied-shape handling for rank > 2 | expand |
Hi Tobias, > implied-shape: Used with PARAMETER; takes the shape of the RHS and (F2018, > R824) "implied-shape-spec is assumed-implied-spec, > assumed-implied-spec-list" > > When matching an element in an array spec of this type, i.e. (R821) > "assumed-implied-spec is [lower-bound: ] *", the matcher always returns > AS_ASSUMED_SIZE as – without further knowledge – the two, assumed-size and > implied-shape, are indistinguishable: > > current_type = match_array_element_spec (as); > > When matching the lowest dimension (as->rank = 1), as->type is set to > current_type – for the same reason as above. However, when matching the > second time an element of type "AS_ASSUMED_SIZE", one knows that it cannot > be a valid assumed-size array – but it can be a valid implied-shape > array. Hence, it is turned into the latter: as->type = AS_IMPLIED_SHAPE. > > If we now patch the third, etc. dimension, current_type is still > assumed-size but as->type is now implied-size. Seemingly, the code writer > was confused between assumed-shape and assumed-size … > > Committed as Rev. 279835 after building an regtesting the attached patch. seems you missed +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O0 compilation failed to produce executable +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O1 compilation failed to produce executable +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O2 compilation failed to produce executable +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions compilation failed to produce executable +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O3 -g compilation failed to produce executable +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -Os compilation failed to produce executable The new test is expected to fail compilation everywhere, but is still marked { dg-do run }. Usually a sign of a problem in the regtest procedure: don't check only for (new) FAILs, but compare mail-report.log output before and after the patch. I guess the test should just be marked dg-do compile instead. Rainer
On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 04:43:29PM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Committed as Rev. 279835 after building an regtesting the attached patch.
+UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O0 compilation failed to produce executable
+UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O1 compilation failed to produce executable
+UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O2 compilation failed to produce executable
+UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions compilation failed to produce executable
+UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O3 -g compilation failed to produce executable
+UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -Os compilation failed to produce executable
Fixed thusly, tested on x86_64-linux, committed to trunk as obvious.
2020-01-03 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR fortran/68020
* gfortran.dg/impled_shape_5.f90: Use dg-do compile rather than dg-do
run.
--- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 (revision 279848)
+++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 (working copy)
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-! { dg-do run }
+! { dg-do compile }
!
! PR fortran/68020
!
Jakub
Sorry – I had fixed it locally before the commit, but forgot the "git add" for that change :-( Thanks for the fix. Tobias On 1/3/20 12:59 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 04:43:29PM +0100, Tobias Burnus wrote: >> Committed as Rev. 279835 after building an regtesting the attached patch. > +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O0 compilation failed to produce executable > +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O1 compilation failed to produce executable > +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O2 compilation failed to produce executable > +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions compilation failed to produce executable > +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -O3 -g compilation failed to produce executable > +UNRESOLVED: gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 -Os compilation failed to produce executable > > Fixed thusly, tested on x86_64-linux, committed to trunk as obvious. > > 2020-01-03 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> > > PR fortran/68020 > * gfortran.dg/impled_shape_5.f90: Use dg-do compile rather than dg-do > run. > > --- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 (revision 279848) > +++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 (working copy) > @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ > -! { dg-do run } > +! { dg-do compile } > ! > ! PR fortran/68020 > ! > > Jakub >
Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implied_shape_4.f90 =================================================================== --- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implied_shape_4.f90 (nonexistent) +++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implied_shape_4.f90 (revision 279835) @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +! { dg-do run } +! { dg-additional-options "-std=f2008" } +! +! PR fortran/68020 +! +! Contributed by Gerhard Steinmetz +! +subroutine rank_1_2 + integer, parameter :: a(1, 2) = 0 + integer, parameter :: x(*, *) = a + integer, parameter :: y(11:*, 12:*) = a + integer :: k + if (any (lbound(x) /= [1,1])) stop 1 + if (any (ubound(x) /= [1,2])) stop 2 + if (any (lbound(y) /= [11,12])) stop 3 + if (any (ubound(y) /= [11,13])) stop 4 +end + +subroutine rank_3 + integer, parameter :: a(1, 2, 3) = 0 + integer, parameter :: x(*, *, *) = a + integer, parameter :: y(11:*, 12:*, 13:*) = a + integer :: k + if (any (lbound(x) /= [1,1,1])) stop 5 + if (any (ubound(x) /= [1,2,3])) stop 6 + if (any (lbound(y) /= [11,12,13])) stop 7 + if (any (ubound(y) /= [11,13,15])) stop 8 +end + +subroutine rank_4 + integer, parameter :: a(1, 2, 3, 4) = 0 + integer, parameter :: x(*, *, *, *) = a + integer, parameter :: y(11:*, 12:*, 13:*, 14:*) = a + integer :: k + if (any (lbound(x) /= [1,1,1,1])) stop 9 + if (any (ubound(x) /= [1,2,3,4])) stop 10 + if (any (lbound(y) /= [11,12,13,14])) stop 11 + if (any (ubound(y) /= [11,13,15,17])) stop 12 +end + +program p + call rank_1_2 + call rank_3 + call rank_4 +end program p Index: gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 =================================================================== --- gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 (nonexistent) +++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90 (revision 279835) @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +! { dg-do run } +! +! PR fortran/68020 +! +! Reject mixing explicit-shape and implied-shape arrays +! +subroutine rank_1_2 + integer, parameter :: a(1, 2) = 0 + integer, parameter :: y(11:11, 12:*) = a ! { dg-error "Assumed size array at .1. must be a dummy argument" } + integer, parameter :: x(:, *) = a ! { dg-error "Bad specification for deferred shape array" } +end + +subroutine rank_3 + integer, parameter :: a(1, 2, 3) = 0 + integer, parameter :: y(11:*, 12:14, 13:*) = a ! { dg-error "Bad specification for assumed size array" } + integer, parameter :: x(11:*, :, 13:*) = a ! { dg-error "Bad specification for assumed size array" } +end + +subroutine rank_4 + integer, parameter :: a(1, 2, 3, 4) = 0 + integer, parameter :: y(11:*, 12:*, 13:*, 14:17) = a ! { dg-error "Bad array specification for implied-shape array" } + integer, parameter :: y(11:*, 12:*, 13:*, 14:) = a ! { dg-error "Bad array specification for implied-shape array" } +end + +program p + call rank_1_2 + call rank_3 + call rank_4 +end program p Index: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog =================================================================== --- gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (revision 279834) +++ gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (revision 279835) @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ +2020-01-02 Tobias Burnus <tobias@codesourcery.com> + + PR fortran/68020 + * gfortran.dg/implied_shape_4.f90: New. + * gfortran.dg/implied_shape_5.f90: New. + 2020-01-02 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> PR ipa/93087 Index: gcc/fortran/array.c =================================================================== --- gcc/fortran/array.c (revision 279834) +++ gcc/fortran/array.c (revision 279835) @@ -599,7 +599,7 @@ goto cleanup; case AS_IMPLIED_SHAPE: - if (current_type != AS_ASSUMED_SHAPE) + if (current_type != AS_ASSUMED_SIZE) { gfc_error ("Bad array specification for implied-shape" " array at %C"); Index: gcc/fortran/ChangeLog =================================================================== --- gcc/fortran/ChangeLog (revision 279834) +++ gcc/fortran/ChangeLog (revision 279835) @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ +2020-01-02 Tobias Burnus <tobias@codesourcery.com> + + PR fortran/68020 + * array.c (gfc_match_array_spec): Fix implied-type matching + for rank > 2. + 2020-01-01 Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@gcc.gnu.org> PR fortran/93113