[Bug c++/112439] [13/14 Regression] Modification of a member overlapping with a [[no_unique_address]] member in the constructor is incorrectly rejected in constant evaluation since r13-160-g967cdbe6629653

[cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112439

--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The trunk branch has been updated by Jason Merrill <ja...@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f4998609908e4926fc095ce97cb84b187294fd1d

commit r14-8727-gf4998609908e4926fc095ce97cb84b187294fd1d
Author: Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu Feb 1 17:23:53 2024 -0500

    c++: no_unique_address and constexpr [PR112439]

    Here, because we don't build a CONSTRUCTOR for an empty base, we were
    wrongly marking the Foo CONSTRUCTOR as complete after initializing the
Empty
    member.  Fixed by checking empty_base here as well.

            PR c++/112439

    gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

            * constexpr.cc (cxx_eval_store_expression): Check empty_base
            before marking a CONSTRUCTOR readonly.

    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

            * g++.dg/cpp2a/no_unique_address15.C: New test.