On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 11:14:08AM -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Feb 2026, Marek Polacek wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 10:38:42AM -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
> > > Bootstrap and regtest running on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look
> > > OK for trunk/15?
> > > 
> > > -- >8 --
> > > 
> > > Since type pack indexes can be cv-qualified, we need to propagate its
> > > qualifiers when substituting into them.
> > > 
> > >   PR c++/122169
> > > 
> > > gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
> > > 
> > >   * pt.cc (tsubst_pack_index): Propagate cv-qualifiers of a
> > >   PACK_INDEX_TYPE.
> > > 
> > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> > > 
> > >   * g++.dg/cpp26/pack-indexing19.C: New test.
> > > ---
> > >  gcc/cp/pt.cc                                 |  9 +++++++--
> > >  gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp26/pack-indexing19.C | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> > >  2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp26/pack-indexing19.C
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.cc b/gcc/cp/pt.cc
> > > index b8039b731b63..f43bf2ef2d50 100644
> > > --- a/gcc/cp/pt.cc
> > > +++ b/gcc/cp/pt.cc
> > > @@ -14366,10 +14366,15 @@ tsubst_pack_index (tree t, tree args, 
> > > tsubst_flags_t complain, tree in_decl)
> > >    tree index = tsubst_expr (PACK_INDEX_INDEX (t), args, complain, 
> > > in_decl);
> > >    const bool parenthesized_p = (TREE_CODE (t) == PACK_INDEX_EXPR
> > >                           && PACK_INDEX_PARENTHESIZED_P (t));
> > > +  tree r;
> > >    if (!value_dependent_expression_p (index) && TREE_CODE (pack) == 
> > > TREE_VEC)
> > > -    return pack_index_element (index, pack, parenthesized_p, complain);
> > > +    r = pack_index_element (index, pack, parenthesized_p, complain);
> > >    else
> > > -    return make_pack_index (pack, index);
> > > +    r = make_pack_index (pack, index);
> > > +  if (TREE_CODE (t) == PACK_INDEX_TYPE)
> > 
> > No need to check that r is a type, I suppose, since cp_build_qualified_type
> > can deal with an error_mark_node and it can't be anything else than a type.
> 
> That was my thinking too.
> 
> > 
> > > +    r = cp_build_qualified_type (r, cp_type_quals (t) | cp_type_quals 
> > > (r),
> > 
> > Won't cp_type_quals (r) always be TYPE_UNQUALIFIED? 
> 
> Yes if it's a PACK_INDEX_TYPE, but if we fully resolve the pack index
> then r could be arbitrary and cv-qualified, e.g. if in the testcase we
> instantiate f<volatile int>().

Can we please test that, then?  I'm OK with this patch with that added.
Thanks,

Marek

Reply via email to