[PATCH V4 5/6] Resolve dynamic target types of pointers.

[Bernhard Heckel]

On 17/10/2016 14:18, Bernhard Heckel wrote:
> On 17/10/2016 13:24, Bernhard Heckel wrote:
>> On 17/10/2016 12:32, Yao Qi wrote:
>>> Bernhard Heckel <bernhard.heckel@intel.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>>> +set test "print intap, not associated"
>>>>>> +gdb_test_multiple "print intap" $test {
>>>>>> + -re " = \\(PTR TO -> \\( $int \\(:,:\\)\\)\\) <not
>>>>>> associated>\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
>>>>>> +    pass $test
>>>>>> +  }
>>>>>> +  -re " = <not associated>\r\n$gdb_prompt $" {
>>>>>> +    pass $test
>>>>>> +  }
>>>>>> +}
>>>>> Why do we need to different regex here?  Need to handle the 
>>>>> differences
>>>>> of different compilers?  IMO, the former looks reasonable to me.
>>>> A pointer to an array (especially to Variable Length Array, VLA) is
>>>> described in Gfortran's  compiled debug info
>>>> like normal array types + associated property of an pointer.
>>> Could you show the debug information gfortran and ifort generates
>>> respectively?
>>
>> see attachment
>>
>>>
>>>> Not sure if this is a bug in Gfortran or not? I was also thinking to
>>>> make the
>>>> output equal, and check if an array has pointer attributes but ..... I
>>>> don't really like this approach. This would
>>>> cause a lot of "if .. else" construct in the code for example:
>>>> De-reference this pointer, Address operator, ...
>>> If gfortran people confirm it is a bug, we can xfail the test.
>
> I just looked again in the specification. It is not a bug.
> FORTRAN specification 
> (http://www.j3-fortran.org/doc/year/04/04-007.pdf) mention this as 
> "array pointer"
Any comments on this?

Intel Deutschland GmbH
Registered Address: Am Campeon 10-12, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany
Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de
Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Christian Lamprechter
Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau
Registered Office: Munich
Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928