On Fri, 31 Jul 2026, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 01:58:15PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > > On 7/31/26 1:49 PM, Patrick Palka wrote: > > > On Fri, 24 Jul 2026, Marek Polacek wrote: > > > > > > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk? > > > > > > > > -- >8 -- > > > > This is a wrong-code problem starting with the recent check_initializer > > > > simplification (r17-1661). I thought the fix would be to bring some of > > > > those dropped conditions back, but now I think the change just uncovered > > > > a latent bug. > > > > > > FWIW it seems the aforementioned latent bug causes PR126472 and your > > > patch fixes it on trunk! I wonder if backporting this patch to the 16 > > > branch would make sense without r17-1661? > > Nice. > > > I think so, but let's wait a bit to see if the assert breaks anything. > > Sounds good, I'll wait 1-2 weeks. For trunk, I think we might want to > add the https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=126472#c2 test. > > Marek > >
Maybe we could backport this fix to older release branches as well, since the original non-preprocessed testcase from PR126472 works with 10.5 and 11.2 but not with 11.3 or 12+ (after an std::optional refactoring that triggers the front end bug), so I guess it's a regression from the libstdc++ side necessitating the front end fix?
