------- Comment #4 from jakub at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-11-23 21:11 -------
In particular, this is caused by the pt.c (tsubst) change:
@@ -8555,16 +8545,15 @@
gcc_assert (type != unknown_type_node);
/* Reuse typedefs. We need to do this to handle dependent attributes,
- specifically attribute aligned. */
+ such as attribute aligned. */
if (TYPE_P (t)
&& TYPE_NAME (t)
- && !MAYBE_TAGGED_TYPE_P (t)
- && TREE_CODE (t) != TEMPLATE_TEMPLATE_PARM
- && TREE_CODE (t) != UNBOUND_CLASS_TEMPLATE)
+ && TYPE_NAME (t) != TYPE_MAIN_DECL (t))
{
tree decl = TYPE_NAME (t);
- if (DECL_CLASS_SCOPE_P (decl))
+ if (DECL_CLASS_SCOPE_P (decl)
+ && CLASSTYPE_TEMPLATE_INFO (DECL_CONTEXT (decl)))
{
tree tmpl = most_general_template (DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (decl));
tree gen_args = tsubst (DECL_TI_ARGS (decl), args, complain,
in_decl);
r = retrieve_specialization (tmpl, gen_args, false);
}
else if (DECL_FUNCTION_SCOPE_P (decl))
r = retrieve_local_specialization (decl);
else
r = NULL_TREE;
In this case t is RECORD_TYPE in function scope, so MAYBE_TAGGED_TYPE_P was
true on it, but this (fn_type_unification) wasn't called from instantiate_decl
and so local_specializations is NULL.
I wonder if just
- else if (DECL_FUNCTION_SCOPE_P (decl))
+ else if (DECL_FUNCTION_SCOPE_P (decl) && local_specializations)
wouldn't be best fix for this, there are already other places which guard
retrieve_local_specialization calls by this condition.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34206
