[Bug c++/101247] ICE when using static constexpr bool defined in parent-class in nested class constructor requires-clause
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101247 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Target Milestone|--- |11.2 Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka --- Fixed for GCC 11.2/12
[Bug c++/101247] ICE when using static constexpr bool defined in parent-class in nested class constructor requires-clause
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101247 --- Comment #5 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:6d11dd94e53103641f9826b14e3086399f2a948c commit r11-8733-g6d11dd94e53103641f9826b14e3086399f2a948c Author: Patrick Palka Date: Fri Jul 9 10:20:22 2021 -0400 c++: find_template_parameters and TEMPLATE_DECLs [PR101247] r12-1989 fixed the testcase in the PR, but unfortunately the fix is buggy: it breaks the case where the common template between the TEMPLATE_DECL t and ctx_parms is the innermost template (as in concepts-memtmpl5.C below). This can be fixed by instead passing the TREE_TYPE of ctmpl to common_enclosing_class when ctmpl is a class template. But even after that's fixed, the analogous case where the innermost template is a partial specialization is still broken (as in concepts-memtmpl5a.C below), because ctmpl is always a primary template. So this patch instead takes a diferent approach that doesn't rely on ctx_parms at all: when looking for the template parameters of a TEMPLATE_DECL that are shared with the current template context, just walk its DECL_CONTEXT. As long as the template is not overly general (e.g. we didn't pass it through most_general_template), this should give us exactly what we want, since if a TEMPLATE_DECL can be referred to from some template context then the template parameters it uses must all be in-scope and contained in its DECL_CONTEXT. This effectively makes us treat TEMPLATE_DECLs more similarly to other _DECLs (whose DECL_CONTEXT we also walk). PR c++/101247 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * pt.c (any_template_parm_r) : Just walk the DECL_CONTEXT. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memtmpl4.C: Uncomment the commented out example, which we now handle correctly. * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memtmpl5.C: New test. * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memtmpl5a.C: New test. (cherry picked from commit f53e66019df819f55d424cc56f8b0ea81c074b55)
[Bug c++/101247] ICE when using static constexpr bool defined in parent-class in nested class constructor requires-clause
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101247 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits --- The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2902f2d8424cfa365fec49401fa066e2b6de9ca4 commit r11-8732-g2902f2d8424cfa365fec49401fa066e2b6de9ca4 Author: Patrick Palka Date: Fri Jul 2 13:54:57 2021 -0400 c++: unqualified member template in constraint [PR101247] Here any_template_parm_r is failing to mark the template parameters implicitly used by the unqualified use of 'd' inside the constraint because the code to do so assumes each level of a template parameter list points to the corresponding primary template, but here the parameter level for A in the out-of-line definition of A::B does not (nor do the parameter levels for A and C in the definition of A::C), which causes us to overlook the sharing. So it seems we can't in general depend on the TREE_TYPE of a template parameter level being non-empty here. This patch partially fixes this by rewriting the relevant part of any_template_parm_r to not depend on the TREE_TYPE of outer levels. We still depend on the innermost level to point to the innermost primary template, so we still crash on the commented out line in the below testcase. PR c++/101247 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * pt.c (any_template_parm_r) : Rewrite to use common_enclosing_class and to not depend on the TREE_TYPE of outer levels pointing to the corresponding primary template. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memtmpl4.C: New test. (cherry picked from commit e3528ce197f8886869f95e8a8f901861a319851c)
[Bug c++/101247] ICE when using static constexpr bool defined in parent-class in nested class constructor requires-clause
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101247 --- Comment #3 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f53e66019df819f55d424cc56f8b0ea81c074b55 commit r12-2221-gf53e66019df819f55d424cc56f8b0ea81c074b55 Author: Patrick Palka Date: Fri Jul 9 10:20:22 2021 -0400 c++: find_template_parameters and TEMPLATE_DECLs [PR101247] r12-1989 fixed the testcase in the PR, but unfortunately the fix is buggy: it breaks the case where the common template between the TEMPLATE_DECL t and ctx_parms is the innermost template (as in concepts-memtmpl5.C below). This can be fixed by instead passing the TREE_TYPE of ctmpl to common_enclosing_class when ctmpl is a class template. But even after that's fixed, the analogous case where the innermost template is a partial specialization is still broken (as in concepts-memtmpl5a.C below), because ctmpl is always a primary template. So this patch instead takes a diferent approach that doesn't rely on ctx_parms at all: when looking for the template parameters of a TEMPLATE_DECL that are shared with the current template context, just walk its DECL_CONTEXT. As long as the template is not overly general (e.g. we didn't pass it through most_general_template), this should give us exactly what we want, since if a TEMPLATE_DECL can be referred to from some template context then the template parameters it uses must all be in-scope and contained in its DECL_CONTEXT. This effectively makes us treat TEMPLATE_DECLs more similarly to other _DECLs (whose DECL_CONTEXT we also walk). PR c++/101247 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * pt.c (any_template_parm_r) : Just walk the DECL_CONTEXT. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memtmpl4.C: Uncomment the commented out example, which we now handle correctly. * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memtmpl5.C: New test. * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memtmpl5a.C: New test.
[Bug c++/101247] ICE when using static constexpr bool defined in parent-class in nested class constructor requires-clause
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101247 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e3528ce197f8886869f95e8a8f901861a319851c commit r12-1989-ge3528ce197f8886869f95e8a8f901861a319851c Author: Patrick Palka Date: Fri Jul 2 13:54:57 2021 -0400 c++: unqualified member template in constraint [PR101247] Here any_template_parm_r is failing to mark the template parameters implicitly used by the unqualified use of 'd' inside the constraint because the code to do so assumes each level of a template parameter list points to the corresponding primary template, but here the parameter level for A in the out-of-line definition of A::B does not (nor do the parameter levels for A and C in the definition of A::C), which causes us to overlook the sharing. So it seems we can't in general depend on the TREE_TYPE of a template parameter level being non-empty here. This patch partially fixes this by rewriting the relevant part of any_template_parm_r to not depend on the TREE_TYPE of outer levels. We still depend on the innermost level to point to the innermost primary template, so we still crash on the commented out line in the below testcase. PR c++/101247 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * pt.c (any_template_parm_r) : Rewrite to use common_enclosing_class and to not depend on the TREE_TYPE of outer levels pointing to the corresponding primary template. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memtmpl4.C: New test.
[Bug c++/101247] ICE when using static constexpr bool defined in parent-class in nested class constructor requires-clause
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101247 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org CC||ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
