On 11/18/22 11:34, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 11:24:45AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
Right, that's the C++17 implicit constexpr for lambdas, finish_function:
/* Lambda closure members are implicitly constexpr if possible. */
if (cxx_dialect >= cxx17
&&
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 11:24:45AM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > Right, that's the C++17 implicit constexpr for lambdas, finish_function:
> >
> >/* Lambda closure members are implicitly constexpr if possible. */
> >if (cxx_dialect >= cxx17
> >&& LAMBDA_TYPE_P (CP_DECL_CONTEXT
On 11/18/22 10:03, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 08:48:32AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 07:15:05PM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
--- gcc/cp/decl.cc.jj 2022-11-16 14:44:43.692339668 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/decl.cc 2022-11-17 20:53:44.102011594 +0100
@@
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 10:03:18AM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > the lambda operator() when still a template as constexpr and then
> > cp_finish_decl -> diagnose_static_in_constexpr pedwarns on it.
> > For the above perhaps we could figure out there is a static int k; in the
> > operator() and
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 08:48:32AM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 07:15:05PM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > --- gcc/cp/decl.cc.jj 2022-11-16 14:44:43.692339668 +0100
> > > +++ gcc/cp/decl.cc2022-11-17 20:53:44.102011594 +0100
> > > @@ -5600,6 +5600,57 @@
On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 07:15:05PM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > --- gcc/cp/decl.cc.jj 2022-11-16 14:44:43.692339668 +0100
> > +++ gcc/cp/decl.cc 2022-11-17 20:53:44.102011594 +0100
> > @@ -5600,6 +5600,57 @@ groktypename (cp_decl_specifier_seq *typ
> >return type;
> > }
> >
> >
On 11/17/22 15:42, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 07:42:40PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
I thought for older C++ this is to catch
void
foo ()
{
constexpr int a = ({ static constexpr int b = 2; b; });
}
and for C++23 the only 3 spots that diagnose those.
But
On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 09:42:17PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 07:42:40PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > I thought for older C++ this is to catch
> > void
> > foo ()
> > {
> > constexpr int a = ({ static constexpr int b = 2; b; });
> > }
> > and for
On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 07:42:40PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc-patches wrote:
> I thought for older C++ this is to catch
> void
> foo ()
> {
> constexpr int a = ({ static constexpr int b = 2; b; });
> }
> and for C++23 the only 3 spots that diagnose those.
> But perhaps for C++20 or older we
