From 6df7764520213e8621ed0586bfc0c5759e285463 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Thomas Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 19:38:48 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] re PR fortran/28971 (ICE: Segmentation fault on valid code) 2006-09-12 Paul Thomas PR fortran/28971 gfortran.dg/pr28971.f90: New test to act as a backstop in case this undiagnosed regression reappears. From-SVN: r116904 --- gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog | 6 ++++++ gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr28971.f90 | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr28971.f90 diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog b/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog index 885bcd7303b..7764fb05ab2 100644 --- a/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog +++ b/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ +2006-09-12 Paul Thomas + + PR fortran/28971 + gfortran.dg/pr28971.f90: New test to act as a backstop in case + this undiagnosed regression reappears. + 2006-09-12 Kazu Hirata * lib/c-torture.exp (c-torture-compile, c-torture-execute): diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr28971.f90 b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr28971.f90 new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..23045fce453 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gfortran.dg/pr28971.f90 @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ +! { dg-do compile } +! This caused an ICE for gfortrans of July 2006 vintage. It was a regression +! that "fixed" itself. The cause and the fix are mysteries. This test is intended +! to signal any further regression, should it occur. +! +! Contributed by Oskar Enoksson + +SUBROUTINE BUG(A,B) + IMPLICIT NONE + + INTEGER :: A + INTEGER :: B(2) + + INTEGER, PARAMETER :: C(2) = (/ 1,2 /) + + WHERE (C(:).EQ.A) + B = -1 + END WHERE +END SUBROUTINE BUG + -- 2.30.2