[Bug c++/70610] [6 regression] error: invalid initialization of non-const reference of type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70610 Andrew Pinski changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |6.0
[Bug c++/70610] [6 regression] error: invalid initialization of non-const reference of type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70610 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #8 from Patrick Palka --- Fixed.
[Bug c++/70610] [6 regression] error: invalid initialization of non-const reference of type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70610 --- Comment #7 from Patrick Palka --- Author: ppalka Date: Wed Apr 13 00:06:51 2016 New Revision: 234926 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=234926=gcc=rev Log: Fix PR c++/70610 (wrong overload resolution during template processing) gcc/cp/ChangeLog: PR c++/70610 * tree.c (lvalue_kind) [NON_DEPENDENT_EXPR]: Unconditionally recurse into it. * typeck.c (build_x_conditional_expr): Unconditionally remember that the result is an lvalue or xvalue. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: PR c++/70610 * g++.dg/template/pr70610.C: New test. * g++.dg/template/pr70610-2.C: New test. * g++.dg/template/pr70610-3.C: New test. * g++.dg/template/pr70610-4.C: New test. Added: trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/pr70610-2.C trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/pr70610-3.C trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/pr70610-4.C trunk/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/pr70610.C Modified: trunk/gcc/cp/ChangeLog trunk/gcc/cp/tree.c trunk/gcc/cp/typeck.c trunk/gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
[Bug c++/70610] [6 regression] error: invalid initialization of non-const reference of type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70610 --- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka --- uhhh... here: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-04/msg00482.html
[Bug c++/70610] [6 regression] error: invalid initialization of non-const reference of type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70610 Patrick Palka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed||2016-04-11 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #5 from Patrick Palka --- Patch
[Bug c++/70610] [6 regression] error: invalid initialization of non-const reference of type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70610 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, ||jason at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- #c3 changed behavior (started to be rejected) with r181174.
[Bug c++/70610] [6 regression] error: invalid initialization of non-const reference of type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70610
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka ---
Not limited to operator overloads either:
void bar (const int &, int &);
void bar (int &, const int &);
void bar (const int &, const int &);
int a, b;
template
void
foo ()
{
bar (a + 1, b + 2);
}
[Bug c++/70610] [6 regression] error: invalid initialization of non-const reference of type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70610
--- Comment #2 from Patrick Palka ---
This general issue about the unconditional lvalue-ness of NON_DEPENDENT_EXPR
existed before my patch for PR c++/21802 though. For example, ere's a test
case that should compile cleanly but doesn't since at least g++ 4.4 (-std=c++98
is required) for basically the same reason:
struct A { };
void operator+ (const A &, A &);
void operator+ (A &, const A &);
void operator+ (const A &, const A &);
template
void
foo ()
{
A () + A ();
}
unary_plus.C: In function ‘void foo()’:
unary_plus.C:11:8: error: ambiguous overload for ‘operator+’ (operand types are
‘A’ and ‘A’)
A () + A ();
~^~
unary_plus.C:3:6: note: candidate: void operator+(const A&, A&)
void operator+ (const A &, A &);
^~~~
unary_plus.C:4:6: note: candidate: void operator+(A&, const A&)
void operator+ (A &, const A &);
^~~~
unary_plus.C:5:6: note: candidate: void operator+(const A&, const A&)
void operator+ (const A &, const A &);
^~~~
[Bug c++/70610] [6 regression] error: invalid initialization of non-const reference of type
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70610 --- Comment #1 from Patrick Palka --- The problem is that during template processing we think the operand to the unary + is an lvalue (because it's wrapped in a NON_DEPENDENT_EXPR node) and so during overload resolution we select the non-const overload of operator+. Then during instantiation, since the operand is actually an rvalue we reject the function call since it requires the operand to be an lvalue.
