[Bug c++/101087] [9/10/11/12 Regression] Unevaluated operand of sizeof affects noexcept operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101087 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:879e7df182910886789aaac493efb0bc31ab0982 commit r10-9972-g879e7df182910886789aaac493efb0bc31ab0982 Author: Marek Polacek Date: Wed Jul 7 20:02:18 2021 -0400 c++: Fix noexcept with unevaluated operand [PR101087] It sounds plausible that this assert int f(); static_assert(noexcept(sizeof(f(; should pass: sizeof produces a std::size_t and its operand is not evaluated, so it can't throw. noexcept should only evaluate to false for potentially evaluated operands. Therefore I think that check_noexcept_r shouldn't walk into operands of sizeof/decltype/ alignof/typeof. PR c++/101087 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * cp-tree.h (unevaluated_p): New. * except.c (check_noexcept_r): Use it. Don't walk into unevaluated operands. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept70.C: New test. (cherry picked from commit cbef732522568f8adce46c472b16391c864d0fd0)
[Bug c++/101087] [9/10/11/12 Regression] Unevaluated operand of sizeof affects noexcept operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101087 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:cbef732522568f8adce46c472b16391c864d0fd0 commit r11-8709-gcbef732522568f8adce46c472b16391c864d0fd0 Author: Marek Polacek Date: Wed Jul 7 20:02:18 2021 -0400 c++: Fix noexcept with unevaluated operand [PR101087] It sounds plausible that this assert int f(); static_assert(noexcept(sizeof(f(; should pass: sizeof produces a std::size_t and its operand is not evaluated, so it can't throw. noexcept should only evaluate to false for potentially evaluated operands. Therefore I think that check_noexcept_r shouldn't walk into operands of sizeof/decltype/ alignof/typeof. PR c++/101087 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * cp-tree.h (unevaluated_p): New. * except.c (check_noexcept_r): Use it. Don't walk into unevaluated operands. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept70.C: New test. (cherry picked from commit dee00bf6894be0cabb8f263c993357a6f8444f8b)
[Bug c++/101087] [9/10/11/12 Regression] Unevaluated operand of sizeof affects noexcept operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101087 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Marek Polacek : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:dee00bf6894be0cabb8f263c993357a6f8444f8b commit r12-2174-gdee00bf6894be0cabb8f263c993357a6f8444f8b Author: Marek Polacek Date: Wed Jul 7 20:02:18 2021 -0400 c++: Fix noexcept with unevaluated operand [PR101087] It sounds plausible that this assert int f(); static_assert(noexcept(sizeof(f(; should pass: sizeof produces a std::size_t and its operand is not evaluated, so it can't throw. noexcept should only evaluate to false for potentially evaluated operands. Therefore I think that check_noexcept_r shouldn't walk into operands of sizeof/decltype/ alignof/typeof. PR c++/101087 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * cp-tree.h (unevaluated_p): New. * except.c (check_noexcept_r): Use it. Don't walk into unevaluated operands. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept70.C: New test.
[Bug c++/101087] [9/10/11/12 Regression] Unevaluated operand of sizeof affects noexcept operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101087 Marek Polacek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Marek Polacek --- Testing a patch.
[Bug c++/101087] [9/10/11/12 Regression] Unevaluated operand of sizeof affects noexcept operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101087
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
Last reconfirmed||2021-06-16
Summary|Unevaluated operand of |[9/10/11/12 Regression]
|sizeof affects noexcept |Unevaluated operand of
|operator|sizeof affects noexcept
||operator
Known to fail||10.3.0, 11.1.0, 12.0,
||4.8.0, 9.4.0
Known to work||4.7.4
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
It compiled with GCC 4.7 but stopped with r192141 (or r192142 but almost
certainly the former):
cp-tree.h (SIZEOF_EXPR_TYPE_P): Define.
cp/
* cp-tree.h (SIZEOF_EXPR_TYPE_P): Define.
* tree.c (cp_tree_equal): Handle SIZEOF_EXPR with
SIZEOF_EXPR_TYPE_P.
* mangle.c (write_expression): Likewise.
* cxx-pretty-print.c (pp_cxx_unary_expression): Likewise.
* error.c (dump_expr): Likewise.
* parser.c (cp_parser_unary_expression): For sizeof call
cxx_sizeof_or_alignof_{type,expr} just for diagnostics and
return SIZEOF_EXPR with the operand.
* pt.c (tsubst_copy, tsubst_copy_and_build): For SIZEOF_EXPR,
call cxx_sizeof_or_alignof_{type,expr} for diagnostics, but
return SIZEOF_EXPR with tsubsted operand.
(value_dependent_expression_p): Handle SIZEOF_EXPR with
SIZEOF_EXPR_TYPE_P.
(instantiation_dependent_r): Likewise.
* call.c (null_ptr_cst_p): Call maybe_constant_value for C++98.
* semantics.c (finish_call_expr): Call
sizeof_pointer_memaccess_warning if needed.
(cxx_eval_constant_expression): Handle SIZEOF_EXPR.
(potential_constant_expression_1): Remove early exit for
C++98. Handle PROPERTY_REF.
* decl.c (duplicate_decls): When redeclaring a builtin function,
keep the merged decl builtin also if newdecl is a gnu_inline
inline definition.
(fold_sizeof_expr_r): New function.
(compute_array_index_type): Fold SIZEOF_EXPRs in itype.
* cp-gimplify.c (cp_genericize_r): Fold SIZEOF_EXPR.
* typeck.c (cp_build_binary_op): For warn_for_sign_compare
try harder using maybe_constant_value to get INTEGER_CSTs.
* decl.c (stabilize_vla_size): Call pointer_set_destroy
at the end.
testsuite/
* g++.dg/torture/Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess1.C: New test.
* g++.dg/torture/Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess2.C: New test.
* g++.dg/warn/Wsign-compare-5.C: New test.
* g++.dg/warn/Wsizeof-pointer-memaccess-1.C: New test.
* g++.dg/warn/Wnull-conversion-1.C: For c++11 add dg-error.
* g++.dg/ext/builtin30.C: New test.
* g++.dg/ext/vla12.C: New test.
* gcc.dg/builtins-85.c: New test.
libstdc++-v3/
* testsuite/20_util/shared_ptr/cons/43820_neg.cc: Adjust line
numbers.
