diff mbox series

[fortran] PR104555 - ICE in gfc_compare_derived_types, at fortran/interface.cc:628 since r10-2912-g70570ec192745095

Message ID CAGkQGiKp=7tgx8mCgP+Sp80HfGi4VD-m-9fsd-GVxeY3a2aDAA@mail.gmail.com
State New
Headers show
Series [fortran] PR104555 - ICE in gfc_compare_derived_types, at fortran/interface.cc:628 since r10-2912-g70570ec192745095 | expand

Commit Message

Paul Richard Thomas Oct. 29, 2023, 12:29 p.m. UTC 
Bizarrely, since the fix for pr101625, the testcase compiles and runs
correctly with s/select type (y => x)/select type (y => (x))/ !

The fix is straightforward and appears to be one of those wrinkles arising
from the use of associate variables as a selector. The fault is reasonable
since the expression is a reference to the _data field, which is of derived
type. However, being a select type selector, the selector must be a
class with that declared type.

Regtests fine. OK for mainline?

Paul

Fortran: Fix a problem with SELECT TYPE selectors [PR104555].

2023-10-29  Paul Thomas  <pault@gcc.gnu.org>

gcc/fortran
PR fortran/104555
* resolve.cc (resolve_select_type): If the selector expression
has no class component references and the expression is a
derived type, copy the typespec of the symbol to that of the
expression.

gcc/testsuite/
PR fortran/104555
* gfortran.dg/pr104555.f90: New test.

Comments

Harald Anlauf Oct. 29, 2023, 7:15 p.m. UTC | #1 
Hi Paul,

  	    code->expr1->symtree->n.sym->ts = code->expr2->ts;
+	  /* Sometimes the selector expression is given the typespec of the
+	     '_data' field, which is logical enough but inappropraite here. */

s/inappropraite/inappropriate/

+	  if (code->expr2->ts.type == BT_DERIVED


otherwise it LGTM.

Thanks for the patch!

Harald

On 10/29/23 13:29, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
> Bizarrely, since the fix for pr101625, the testcase compiles and runs
> correctly with s/select type (y => x)/select type (y => (x))/ !
> 
> The fix is straightforward and appears to be one of those wrinkles arising
> from the use of associate variables as a selector. The fault is reasonable
> since the expression is a reference to the _data field, which is of derived
> type. However, being a select type selector, the selector must be a
> class with that declared type.
> 
> Regtests fine. OK for mainline?
> 
> Paul
> 
> Fortran: Fix a problem with SELECT TYPE selectors [PR104555].
> 
> 2023-10-29  Paul Thomas  <pault@gcc.gnu.org>
> 
> gcc/fortran
> PR fortran/104555
> * resolve.cc (resolve_select_type): If the selector expression
> has no class component references and the expression is a
> derived type, copy the typespec of the symbol to that of the
> expression.
> 
> gcc/testsuite/
> PR fortran/104555
> * gfortran.dg/pr104555.f90: New test.
>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc b/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc
index 9f4dc072645..b394f7fc79c 100644
--- a/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc
+++ b/gcc/fortran/resolve.cc
@@ -9578,6 +9578,12 @@  resolve_select_type (gfc_code *code, gfc_namespace *old_ns)
 	{
 	  if (code->expr1->symtree->n.sym->attr.untyped)
 	    code->expr1->symtree->n.sym->ts = code->expr2->ts;
+	  /* Sometimes the selector expression is given the typespec of the
+	     '_data' field, which is logical enough but inappropraite here. */
+	  if (code->expr2->ts.type == BT_DERIVED
+	      && code->expr2->symtree
+	      && code->expr2->symtree->n.sym->ts.type == BT_CLASS)
+	    code->expr2->ts = code->expr2->symtree->n.sym->ts;
 	  selector_type = CLASS_DATA (code->expr2)
 	    ? CLASS_DATA (code->expr2)->ts.u.derived : code->expr2->ts.u.derived;
 	}