[PATCH] D88313: [flang] Failed call to CHECK() for call to ASSOCIATED(NULL())

Peter Klausler via Phabricator via llvm-commits llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
Wed Sep 30 11:06:44 PDT 2020


klausler added inline comments.


================
Comment at: flang/lib/Evaluate/characteristics.cpp:431
+bool DummyArgument::IsTypelessIntrinsicDummy() const {
+  if (auto *argObj{std::get_if<characteristics::DummyDataObject>(&u)}) {
+    if (argObj->type.type().IsTypelessIntrinsicArgument()) {
----------------
Please use `const auto *` here.


================
Comment at: flang/lib/Evaluate/intrinsics.cpp:1729
+          // procPointer is null if there was an error with the analysis
+          // assoicated with the procedure pointer
+          if (procPointer) {
----------------
associated*


================
Comment at: flang/lib/Evaluate/intrinsics.cpp:286
+        {{"pointer", AnyPointer, Rank::known},
             {"target", Addressable, Rank::known, Optionality::optional}},
         DefaultLogical, Rank::elemental, IntrinsicClass::inquiryFunction},
----------------
PeteSteinfeld wrote:
> klausler wrote:
> > Can the optional `TARGET=` argument be `NULL(MOLD=)` or even just `NULL()`?
> Good question.
> 
> My reading of the standard is that `NULL()` should be allowed as the `TARGET`
> argument of `ASSOCIATED()`.  The note at the bottom of section 16.9.16
> explicitly mentions `disassociated pointers`.  Also, if we're going to allow
> `NULL()` as the first argument, it seems like we're implicitly stating that
> null pointers match all pointer types, and thus we should allow `NULL()` as the
> second argument to `ASSOCIATED()`.
> 
> I wrote some tests and tried them on several compilers.  The only one that
> seems to agree with my analysis above is IBM.  GNU, pgf90, nagfor, and ifort
> all give various compile-time errors when using any form of `null()` as the
> second argument to `ASSOCIATED()`.
Will you allow `NULL()` as the second (TARGET=) argument here?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D88313/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D88313



More information about the llvm-commits mailing list