| Message ID | CAGkQGiJv6oqU8_PWiWq-U4BpyDrk8nhvqtm8PC56cQVZWJQpxw@mail.gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [fortran] PR103471 - [11/12/13/14 Regression] ICE in gfc_typenode_for_spec, at fortran/trans-types.c:1114 | expand |
Hi Paul, the patch is OK, but I had to manually fix it. I wonder how you managed to produce: diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr93484.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr93484.f90 new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..4dcad47e8da --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr103471.f90 @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ A minor comment on the error message and the testcase. Take for example: subroutine sub implicit none real, external :: x real :: y(10) integer :: kk print *, [real(x(k))] ! print *, [real(y(k))] end The original testcase in the PR would - without implicit none - resemble the function invocation x(k) here and emit the error: Fatal Error: k at (1) has no default type compilation terminated. while commenting the first print and uncommenting the second would emit the message Error: Symbol 'k' at (1) has no IMPLICIT type; did you mean 'kk'? Thus I have the impression that the testcase tests something different on the one hand, and on the other I wonder if we would want to change the error message and replace "no default type" to "no IMPLICIT type". It still would not hit the fuzzy check, but that is something that might not be important now. Thanks, Harald On 4/19/24 18:52, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: > Hi All, > > This is a more or less obvious patch. The action is in resolve.cc. The > chunk in symbol.cc is a tidy up of a diagnostic marker to distinguish where > the 'no IMPLICIT type' error was coming from and the chunk in trans-decl.cc > follows from discussion with Harald on the PR. > > Regtests fine. OK for mainline and backporting in a couple of weeks? > > Paul > > Fortran: Detect 'no implicit type' error in right place [PR103471] > > 2024-04-19 Paul Thomas <pault@gcc.gnu.org> > > gcc/fortran > PR fortran/103471 > * resolve.cc (gfc_resolve_index_1): Block index expressions of > unknown type from being converted to default integer, avoiding > the fatal error in trans-decl.cc. > * symbol.cc (gfc_set_default_type): Remove '(symbol)' from the > 'no IMPLICIT type' error message. > * trans-decl.cc (gfc_get_symbol_decl): Change fatal error locus > to that of the symbol declaration. > (gfc_trans_deferred_vars): Remove two trailing tabs. > > gcc/testsuite/ > PR fortran/103471 > * gfortran.dg/pr103471.f90: New test. >
Hi Harald, > > the patch is OK, but I had to manually fix it. I wonder how you managed > to produce: > Yes, I had to use --whitespace fix when I reapplied it a few minutes ago. > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr93484.f90 > I had followed comment 1 in the PR and wrongly named the file because of it. Now corrected. > > subroutine sub > implicit none > real, external :: x > real :: y(10) > integer :: kk > print *, [real(x(k))] > ! print *, [real(y(k))] > end > This is another problem, somewhere upstream from resolve.cc, which I have just spent an hour failing to find. In the presence of both print statements, in no matter which order, it is the error in trans-decl.cc that applies. > Thus I have the impression that the testcase tests something different > on the one hand, and on the other I wonder if we would want to change > the error message and replace "no default type" to "no IMPLICIT type". > It still would not hit the fuzzy check, but that is something that > might not be important now. > The fuzzy check was intended to ensure that the error was being detected in the "right" place. I want to keep the "no default type" message for the time being at least so as to identify exactly where it comes from. Getting to trans-decl.cc with an unknown type is just wrong. I'll come back to you on this. Thanks for the report. Paul
Hi Paul! On 4/20/24 09:54, Paul Richard Thomas wrote: >> subroutine sub >> implicit none >> real, external :: x >> real :: y(10) >> integer :: kk >> print *, [real(x(k))] >> ! print *, [real(y(k))] >> end >> > > This is another problem, somewhere upstream from resolve.cc, which I have > just spent an hour failing to find. In the presence of both print > statements, in no matter which order, it is the error in trans-decl.cc that > applies. Indeed, the gfc_fatal_error always wins. (I had tried to replace it with gfc_error()/return NULL_TREE, but then I hit an ICE later on. When trying to find out who added the said code, guess whom I found :) > >> Thus I have the impression that the testcase tests something different >> on the one hand, and on the other I wonder if we would want to change >> the error message and replace "no default type" to "no IMPLICIT type". >> It still would not hit the fuzzy check, but that is something that >> might not be important now. >> > > The fuzzy check was intended to ensure that the error was being detected in > the "right" place. I want to keep the "no default type" message for the > time being at least so as to identify exactly where it comes from. Getting > to trans-decl.cc with an unknown type is just wrong. True. > I'll come back to you on this. This PR is marked as a regression. Depending on your progress, it might be worth to consider fixing what you think is needed to get rid of the regression marker and defer the improvement of the diagnostics to a second patch. Harald > Thanks for the report. > > Paul >
diff --git a/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc b/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc index 6b3e5ba4fcb..9b7fabd3707 100644 --- a/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc +++ b/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc @@ -5001,7 +5001,8 @@ gfc_resolve_index_1 (gfc_expr *index, int check_scalar, if ((index->ts.kind != gfc_index_integer_kind && force_index_integer_kind) - || index->ts.type != BT_INTEGER) + || (index->ts.type != BT_INTEGER + && index->ts.type != BT_UNKNOWN)) { gfc_clear_ts (&ts); ts.type = BT_INTEGER; diff --git a/gcc/fortran/symbol.cc b/gcc/fortran/symbol.cc index 3a3b6de5cec..8f7deac1d1e 100644 --- a/gcc/fortran/symbol.cc +++ b/gcc/fortran/symbol.cc @@ -320,7 +320,7 @@ gfc_set_default_type (gfc_symbol *sym, int error_flag, gfc_namespace *ns) "; did you mean %qs?", sym->name, &sym->declared_at, guessed); else - gfc_error ("Symbol %qs at %L has no IMPLICIT type(symbol)", + gfc_error ("Symbol %qs at %L has no IMPLICIT type", sym->name, &sym->declared_at); sym->attr.untyped = 1; /* Ensure we only give an error once. */ } diff --git a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc index e160c5c98c1..301439baaf5 100644 --- a/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc +++ b/gcc/fortran/trans-decl.cc @@ -1797,7 +1797,8 @@ gfc_get_symbol_decl (gfc_symbol * sym) } if (sym->ts.type == BT_UNKNOWN) - gfc_fatal_error ("%s at %C has no default type", sym->name); + gfc_fatal_error ("%s at %L has no default type", sym->name, + &sym->declared_at); if (sym->attr.intrinsic) gfc_internal_error ("intrinsic variable which isn't a procedure"); @@ -5214,8 +5215,8 @@ gfc_trans_deferred_vars (gfc_symbol * proc_sym, gfc_wrapped_block * block) tree tmp = lookup_attribute ("omp allocate", DECL_ATTRIBUTES (n->sym->backend_decl)); tmp = TREE_VALUE (tmp); - TREE_PURPOSE (tmp) = se.expr; - TREE_VALUE (tmp) = align; + TREE_PURPOSE (tmp) = se.expr; + TREE_VALUE (tmp) = align; TREE_PURPOSE (TREE_CHAIN (tmp)) = init_stmtlist; TREE_VALUE (TREE_CHAIN (tmp)) = cleanup_stmtlist; } diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr93484.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr93484.f90 new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..4dcad47e8da --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr103471.f90 @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ +! { dg-do compile } +! Test the fix for PR103471 in which, rather than giving a "no IMPLICIT type" +! message, gfortran took to ICEing. The fuzzy symbol check for 'kk' demonstrates +! that the error is being detected in the right place. +! +! Contributed by Gerhard Steinmetz <gscfq@t-online.de> +! +program p + implicit none + integer, parameter :: x(4) = [1,2,3,4] + integer :: kk + print *, [real(x(k))] ! { dg-error "has no IMPLICIT type; did you mean .kk.\\?" } +end