Hi,
a rather straightforward issue that we didn't notice so far only because
in all our uses of __is_trivially_constructible either neither type is
dependent or both are (eg, in library uses). The below handles in the
obvious way a possible TREE_LIST - built node by node by
cp_parser_trait_expr in the variadic case - as TRAIT_EXPR_TYPE2. Tested
x86_64-linux. Seems suitable for the branches too.
Thanks, Paolo.
///////////////////////
/cp
2017-10-18 Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com>
PR c++/80991
* pt.c (value_dependent_expression_p, [TRAIT_EXPR]): Handle
a TREE_LIST as TRAIT_EXPR_TYPE2.
/testsuite
2017-10-18 Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com>
PR c++/80991
* g++.dg/ext/is_trivially_constructible5.C: New.
Index: cp/pt.c
===================================================================
--- cp/pt.c (revision 253842)
+++ cp/pt.c (working copy)
@@ -24019,8 +24019,21 @@ value_dependent_expression_p (tree expression)
case TRAIT_EXPR:
{
tree type2 = TRAIT_EXPR_TYPE2 (expression);
- return (dependent_type_p (TRAIT_EXPR_TYPE1 (expression))
- || (type2 ? dependent_type_p (type2) : false));
+
+ if (dependent_type_p (TRAIT_EXPR_TYPE1 (expression)))
+ return true;
+
+ if (!type2)
+ return false;
+
+ if (TREE_CODE (type2) != TREE_LIST)
+ return dependent_type_p (type2);
+
+ for (; type2; type2 = TREE_CHAIN (type2))
+ if (dependent_type_p (TREE_VALUE (type2)))
+ return true;
+
+ return false;
}
case MODOP_EXPR:
Index: testsuite/g++.dg/ext/is_trivially_constructible5.C
===================================================================
--- testsuite/g++.dg/ext/is_trivially_constructible5.C (nonexistent)
+++ testsuite/g++.dg/ext/is_trivially_constructible5.C (working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+// PR c++/80991
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+
+template<bool> void foo()
+{
+ static_assert(__is_trivially_constructible(int, int), "");
+}
+
+void bar()
+{
+ foo<true>();
+}
