PR fortran/99348, 102521 - ICEs when initializing DT parameter arrays from scalar
Commit Message
Dear Fortranners,
when initializing parameter arrays from scalars, we did handle only
the case init->expr_type == EXPR_CONSTANT, which misses the case of
derived types. As a consequence the constructor for the r.h.s. was
not set up, which later led to different ICEs.
To solve this I looked at gfc_simplify_spread. I was contemplating
whether to also copy the logic to make this initialization dependent
on -fmax-array-constructor. I chose not to, because there is no
sensible and simple fallback available to handle that case while
allowing the access to array elements. We could instead make that
a warning.
Comments / opinions?
Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for mainline?
As this is an ICE on valid, potentially useful code,
I'd like to backport this to 11-branch.
Thanks,
Harald
Comments
*Ping*
Am 03.10.21 um 21:20 schrieb Harald Anlauf via Fortran:
> Dear Fortranners,
>
> when initializing parameter arrays from scalars, we did handle only
> the case init->expr_type == EXPR_CONSTANT, which misses the case of
> derived types. As a consequence the constructor for the r.h.s. was
> not set up, which later led to different ICEs.
>
> To solve this I looked at gfc_simplify_spread. I was contemplating
> whether to also copy the logic to make this initialization dependent
> on -fmax-array-constructor. I chose not to, because there is no
> sensible and simple fallback available to handle that case while
> allowing the access to array elements. We could instead make that
> a warning.
>
> Comments / opinions?
>
> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for mainline?
>
> As this is an ICE on valid, potentially useful code,
> I'd like to backport this to 11-branch.
>
> Thanks,
> Harald
>
This one looks OK. Sorry I missed it earlier. Thanks again for the patch!
Jerry
On 10/9/21 12:27 PM, Harald Anlauf via Fortran wrote:
> *Ping*
>
> Am 03.10.21 um 21:20 schrieb Harald Anlauf via Fortran:
>> Dear Fortranners,
>>
>> when initializing parameter arrays from scalars, we did handle only
>> the case init->expr_type == EXPR_CONSTANT, which misses the case of
>> derived types. As a consequence the constructor for the r.h.s. was
>> not set up, which later led to different ICEs.
>>
>> To solve this I looked at gfc_simplify_spread. I was contemplating
>> whether to also copy the logic to make this initialization dependent
>> on -fmax-array-constructor. I chose not to, because there is no
>> sensible and simple fallback available to handle that case while
>> allowing the access to array elements. We could instead make that
>> a warning.
>>
>> Comments / opinions?
>>
>> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. OK for mainline?
>>
>> As this is an ICE on valid, potentially useful code,
>> I'd like to backport this to 11-branch.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Harald
>>
>
>
Fortran: handle initialization of derived type parameter arrays from scalar
gcc/fortran/ChangeLog:
PR fortran/99348
PR fortran/102521
* decl.c (add_init_expr_to_sym): Extend initialization of
parameter arrays from scalars to handle derived types.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
PR fortran/99348
PR fortran/102521
* gfortran.dg/parameter_array_init_8.f90: New test.
@@ -2228,12 +2228,16 @@ add_init_expr_to_sym (const char *name, gfc_expr **initp, locus *var_locus)
gfc_expr *array;
int n;
if (sym->attr.flavor == FL_PARAMETER
- && init->expr_type == EXPR_CONSTANT
- && spec_size (sym->as, &size)
- && mpz_cmp_si (size, 0) > 0)
+ && gfc_is_constant_expr (init)
+ && (init->expr_type == EXPR_CONSTANT
+ || init->expr_type == EXPR_STRUCTURE)
+ && spec_size (sym->as, &size)
+ && mpz_cmp_si (size, 0) > 0)
{
array = gfc_get_array_expr (init->ts.type, init->ts.kind,
&init->where);
+ if (init->ts.type == BT_DERIVED)
+ array->ts.u.derived = init->ts.u.derived;
for (n = 0; n < (int)mpz_get_si (size); n++)
gfc_constructor_append_expr (&array->value.constructor,
n == 0
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+! { dg-do run }
+! PR fortran/99348
+! PR fortran/102521
+! Check simplifications for initialization of DT paramameter arrays
+
+program p
+ type t
+ integer :: n
+ end type
+ type(t), parameter :: a(4) = t(1)
+ type(t), parameter :: d(*) = a
+ type(t), parameter :: b(2,2) = reshape(d, [2,2])
+ integer, parameter :: nn = b(2,2)% n
+ type u
+ character(3) :: c
+ end type
+ type(u), parameter :: x(2,3) = u('ab')
+ type(u), parameter :: y(*,*) = transpose (x)
+ character(*), parameter :: c = y(3,2)% c
+ integer, parameter :: lc = c% len
+ integer, parameter :: lyc = len (y(3,2)% c)
+! integer, parameter :: lxc = x(1,1)% c% len ! fails (pr101735?)
+ if (nn /= 1) stop 1
+ if (lc /= 3 .or. lyc /= 3 .or. c /= "ab ") stop 2
+end