On 6/11/19 7:47 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 09:59:46PM -0400, Marek Polacek wrote:
This test segvs since r269078, this hunk in particular:
@@ -4581,8 +4713,9 @@ cxx_eval_constant_expression (const constexpr_ctx *ctx,
tree t,
break;
case SIZEOF_EXPR:
- r = fold_sizeof_expr (t);
- VERIFY_CONSTANT (r);
+ r = cxx_eval_constant_expression (ctx, fold_sizeof_expr (t), lval,
+ non_constant_p, overflow_p,
+ jump_target);
break;
In a template, fold_sizeof_expr will just create a new SIZEOF_EXPR, that is the
same, but not identical; see cxx_sizeof_expr. Then cxx_eval_constant_expression
Not always, if it calls cxx_sizeof_expr, it will, but if it calls
cxx_sizeof_or_alignof_type it will only if the type is dependent or VLA.
So, I'd think you should call cxx_eval_constant_expression if TREE_CODE (r)
!= SIZEOF_EXPR, otherwise probably *non_constant_p = true; is in order,
maybe together with gcc_assert (ctx->quiet); ? I'd hope that if we really
require a constant expression we evaluate it in !processing_template_decl
contexts.
Makes sense. Also, cxx_sizeof_expr should probably only return a
SIZEOF_EXPR if the operand is instantiation-dependent.
Jason
