[Bug c++/92590] [10 Regression] Cannot expose protected default constructor with "using" keyword in gcc 10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92590 --- Comment #5 from Pavel Roskin --- Confirming fix on the original code. Thank you!
[Bug c++/92590] [10 Regression] Cannot expose protected default constructor with "using" keyword in gcc 10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92590 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #4 from Jason Merrill --- Fixed.
[Bug c++/92590] [10 Regression] Cannot expose protected default constructor with "using" keyword in gcc 10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92590 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:08c8c973c082457a7d6192673e87475f1fdfdbef commit r10-5949-g08c8c973c082457a7d6192673e87475f1fdfdbef Author: Jason Merrill Date: Tue Jan 14 13:59:54 2020 -0500 PR c++/92590 - wrong handling of inherited default ctor. I thought my earlier fix for 91930 was an obvious bug fix, but apparently an inherited constructor does not count as user-declared. So this patch reverts that change and the other follow-on patches, and fixes 91930 differently, by not letting the inherited default constructor hide the implicitly-declared default constructor. * class.c (add_method): A constrained inherited ctor doesn't hide an implicit derived ctor. Revert: PR c++/91930 - ICE with constrained inherited default ctor. * name-lookup.c (do_class_using_decl): Set TYPE_HAS_USER_CONSTRUCTOR for inherited constructor. PR c++/92552 - ICE with inherited constrained default ctor. * pt.c (instantiate_class_template_1): Copy TYPE_HAS_USER_CONSTRUCTOR. PR c++/92594 - ICE with inherited trivial default ctor. * method.c (trivial_fn_p): Treat an inherited default constructor like a normal default constructor.
[Bug c++/92590] [10 Regression] Cannot expose protected default constructor with "using" keyword in gcc 10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92590 --- Comment #2 from Jason Merrill --- This is a consequence of the change Jonathan cites, to treat the inherited constructor as a user-declared constructor that prevents the implicit declaration of a default constructor in Derived. The difference in access behavior follows from this; the standard says, "A synonym created by a using-declaration has the usual accessibility for a member-declaration. A using-declarator that names a constructor does not create a synonym; instead, the additional constructors are accessible if they would be accessible when used to construct an object of the corresponding base class, and the accessibility of the using-declaration is ignored." So if constructing 'd' calls the inherited constructor, it's ill-formed; if it calls the implicitly-declared default constructor, it's well-formed. I thought my change was an obvious bug fix, but it seems that other compilers have the old semantics, so I should probably undo it.
[Bug c++/92590] [10 Regression] Cannot expose protected default constructor with "using" keyword in gcc 10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92590 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
[Bug c++/92590] [10 Regression] Cannot expose protected default constructor with "using" keyword in gcc 10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92590 Jonathan Wakely changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed||2019-11-20 CC||jason at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Regressed with r276968: PR c++/91930 - ICE with constrained inherited default ctor. The testcase was crashing because lazily_declare_fn was failing to add a defaulted constructor, because the implicit declaration was less constrained than the inherited default constructor. But when we have an inherited constructor, we shouldn't be trying to declare a default constructor in the first place, because it counts as "a user-declared constructor". With that fixed I needed to adjust a couple of inherited constructor testcases that previously had been diagnosing the default constructor as deleted rather than not declared. * name-lookup.c (do_class_using_decl): Set TYPE_HAS_USER_CONSTRUCTOR for inherited constructor.
[Bug c++/92590] [10 Regression] Cannot expose protected default constructor with "using" keyword in gcc 10
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92590 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||rejects-valid Known to work||9.2.0 Target Milestone|--- |10.0 Summary|Cannot expose protected |[10 Regression] Cannot |default constructor with|expose protected default |"using" keyword in gcc 10 |constructor with "using" ||keyword in gcc 10
