Re: [Patch, fortran] PR90218 - [PDT] ICE: tree check: expected array_type, have record_type in gfc_conv_array_initializer, at fortran/trans-array.c:6071

Am 05.01.26 um 9:51 PM schrieb Jerry D:
> On 1/5/26 8:30 AM, Paul Richard Thomas wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> This PR was largely fixed by preceding patches, insofar as it ran and 
>> produced the expected output, apart from the explicit initialization 
>> expressions for the PDT entities. However, the testcase leaked memory 
>> like a sieve and it has taken a while to sort out a satisfactory fix.
>>
>> The chunks in trans-decl.cc implement the fix for the explicit 
>> initialization of PDT entities. This part is straightforward.
>>
>> The rest of the patch is devoted to fixing the memory leaks triggered 
>> by the new testcase. The problem was associated with pdt_arrays 
>> embedded in PDT structure constructors, which themselves were embedded 
>> in array constructors that were part of a PDT constructor.... if you 
>> see what I mean :-) The original pdt_arrays are copied into a 
>> destination array, which is implicitly allocated 
>> by gfc_duplicate_allocatable. The allocated memory was being lost in 
>> the subsequent copy of the enclosing array constructor. Rescuing and 
>> freeing the memory is accomplished using the finalization block, which 
>> is then executed after the copy of the array constructor. Note that 
>> these frees are not guarded. I don't believe that there is any 
>> circumstance where this will be an issue but, if required, it would be 
>> easily implemented.
>>
>> The chunks in trans-stmt.cc pick up memory leaks in allocation and 
>> deallocation. As a side effect, the leak in pdt_3.f03 is fixed. 
>> PR121972 will be updated accordingly, since pdt_39/70/77.f03 still 
>> leak memory.
>>
>> Regtests on FC43/x86_64. OK for mainline
>>
>> Paul
>>
> 
> Looks Good To Me Paul, also regression tested OK here.
> 
> Jerry
> 

I wanted to says that I am also fine with the patch,
but have a minor question:

+static tree
+gfc_init_default_pdt (gfc_symbol *sym, bool dealloc)
  {
-  /* Allowed in the case where all the components have initializers and
-     there are no LEN components.  */
-  if (sym->ts.type == BT_DERIVED && sym->ts.u.derived->attr.pdt_type)
+  stmtblock_t block;
+  tree tmp;
+  gfc_component *c;
+
+  if (sym->value && sym->value->symtree
+      && sym->value->symtree->n.sym
+      && !sym->value->symtree->n.sym->attr.artificial)

Don't you want to check that sym->value is really a variable
before testing symtree?  I.e.,

if (sym->value && sym->value->expr_type == EXPR_VARIABLE
     && sym->value->symtree
...

Thanks,
Harald