On 5/25/22 13:24, Patrick Palka wrote:
Here during cp_parser_single_declaration for #2, we were calling
associate_classtype_constraints for TPL<T> (the primary template type)
before maybe_process_partial_specialization could get a chance to
notice that we're in fact declaring a distinct constrained partial
spec and not redeclaring the primary template.  This caused us to
emit a bogus error about differing constraints b/t the primary template
the current constraints at #2.  This patch fixes this by moving the
call to associate_classtype_constraints after the call to shadow_tag
(which calls maybe_process_partial_specialization) and adjusting
shadow_tag to use the return value of m_p_p_s.

Moreover, if we later try to define a constrained partial specialization
that's been declared earlier (as in the third testcase), then
maybe_new_partial_specialization correctly notices that it's a
redeclaration and returns NULL_TREE.  But we need to also update TYPE to
point to the constrained class type in this case (it'll otherwise
continue to point to the primary template type, eventually leading to a
bogus error).

Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, also tested against
cmcstl and range-v3, does this look OK for trunk?

OK.

Since it should only
affect concepts code, I wonder about backporting this for 12.2?

OK.

        PR c++/96363

gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

        * decl.cc (shadow_tag): Use the return value of
        maybe_process_partial_specialization.
        * parser.cc (cp_parser_single_declaration): Call shadow_tag
        before associate_classtype_constraints.
        * pt.cc (maybe_new_partial_specialization): Change return type
        to bool.  Take 'type' argument by mutable reference.  Set 'type'
        to point to the correct constrained specialization when
        appropriate.
        (maybe_process_partial_specialization): Adjust accordingly.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

        * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C: New test.
        * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C: New test.
---
  gcc/cp/decl.cc                                |  3 +-
  gcc/cp/parser.cc                              | 12 +++---
  gcc/cp/pt.cc                                  | 38 ++++++++++---------
  .../g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C    | 10 +++++
  .../g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12a.C   | 14 +++++++
  .../g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C    | 16 ++++++++
  6 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C
  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12a.C
  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C

diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.cc b/gcc/cp/decl.cc
index 381259cb9cf..c7caa12f061 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/decl.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl.cc
@@ -5464,7 +5464,8 @@ shadow_tag (cp_decl_specifier_seq *declspecs)
    if (!t)
      return NULL_TREE;
- if (maybe_process_partial_specialization (t) == error_mark_node)
+  t = maybe_process_partial_specialization (t);
+  if (t == error_mark_node)
      return NULL_TREE;
/* This is where the variables in an anonymous union are
diff --git a/gcc/cp/parser.cc b/gcc/cp/parser.cc
index 868b8610d60..d9e78e1f4cc 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/parser.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/parser.cc
@@ -31811,12 +31811,6 @@ cp_parser_single_declaration (cp_parser* parser,
        if (cp_parser_declares_only_class_p (parser)
          || (declares_class_or_enum & 2))
        {
-         /* If this is a declaration, but not a definition, associate
-            any constraints with the type declaration. Constraints
-            are associated with definitions in cp_parser_class_specifier.  */
-         if (declares_class_or_enum == 1)
-           associate_classtype_constraints (decl_specifiers.type);
-
          decl = shadow_tag (&decl_specifiers);
/* In this case:
@@ -31838,6 +31832,12 @@ cp_parser_single_declaration (cp_parser* parser,
          else
            decl = error_mark_node;
+ /* If this is a declaration, but not a definition, associate
+            any constraints with the type declaration. Constraints
+            are associated with definitions in cp_parser_class_specifier.  */
+         if (declares_class_or_enum == 1)
+           associate_classtype_constraints (TREE_TYPE (decl));
+
          /* Perform access checks for template parameters.  */
          cp_parser_perform_template_parameter_access_checks (checks);
diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.cc b/gcc/cp/pt.cc
index b45a29926d2..7de9b11bd12 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/pt.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/pt.cc
@@ -874,12 +874,12 @@ check_explicit_instantiation_namespace (tree spec)
               spec, current_namespace, ns);
  }
-/* Returns the type of a template specialization only if that
-   specialization needs to be defined. Otherwise (e.g., if the type has
-   already been defined), the function returns NULL_TREE.  */
+/* Returns true if TYPE is a new partial specialization that needs to be
+   set up.  This may also modify TYPE to point to the correct (new or
+   existing) constrained partial specialization in any case.  */
-static tree
-maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
+static bool
+maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree& type)
  {
    /* An implicit instantiation of an incomplete type implies
       the definition of a new class template.
@@ -893,7 +893,7 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
       Here, S<T*> is an implicit instantiation of S whose type
       is incomplete.  */
    if (CLASSTYPE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (type) && !COMPLETE_TYPE_P (type))
-    return type;
+    return true;
/* It can also be the case that TYPE is a completed specialization.
       Continuing the previous example, suppose we also declare:
@@ -919,11 +919,11 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
        /* If there are no template parameters, this cannot be a new
         partial template specialization?  */
        if (!current_template_parms)
-        return NULL_TREE;
+       return false;
/* The injected-class-name is not a new partial specialization. */
        if (DECL_SELF_REFERENCE_P (TYPE_NAME (type)))
-       return NULL_TREE;
+       return false;
/* If the constraints are not the same as those of the primary
         then, we can probably create a new specialization.  */
@@ -933,7 +933,7 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
        {
          tree main_constr = get_constraints (tmpl);
          if (equivalent_constraints (type_constr, main_constr))
-           return NULL_TREE;
+           return false;
        }
/* Also, if there's a pre-existing specialization with matching
@@ -946,7 +946,10 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
            tree spec_constr = get_constraints (spec_tmpl);
            if (comp_template_args (args, spec_args)
              && equivalent_constraints (type_constr, spec_constr))
-            return NULL_TREE;
+           {
+             type = TREE_TYPE (spec_tmpl);
+             return false;
+           }
            specs = TREE_CHAIN (specs);
          }
@@ -971,10 +974,11 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
        set_instantiating_module (d);
        DECL_MODULE_EXPORT_P (d) = DECL_MODULE_EXPORT_P (tmpl);
- return t;
+      type = t;
+      return true;
      }
- return NULL_TREE;
+  return false;
  }
/* The TYPE is being declared. If it is a template type, that means it
@@ -1030,16 +1034,16 @@ maybe_process_partial_specialization (tree type)
Make sure that `C<int>' and `C<T*>' are implicit instantiations. */ - if (tree t = maybe_new_partial_specialization (type))
+      if (maybe_new_partial_specialization (type))
        {
-         if (!check_specialization_namespace (CLASSTYPE_TI_TEMPLATE (t))
+         if (!check_specialization_namespace (CLASSTYPE_TI_TEMPLATE (type))
              && !at_namespace_scope_p ())
            return error_mark_node;
-         SET_CLASSTYPE_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (t);
-         DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (TYPE_MAIN_DECL (t)) = input_location;
+         SET_CLASSTYPE_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (type);
+         DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (TYPE_MAIN_DECL (type)) = input_location;
          if (processing_template_decl)
            {
-             tree decl = push_template_decl (TYPE_MAIN_DECL (t));
+             tree decl = push_template_decl (TYPE_MAIN_DECL (type));
              if (decl == error_mark_node)
                return error_mark_node;
              return TREE_TYPE (decl);
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C 
b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..7868092af2b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+// PR c++/96363
+// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
+
+template<class T> class TPL;
+
+template<class T> requires true class TPL<T>;    // #1
+template<class T> requires false class TPL<T>;   // #2 error here
+
+template<class T> requires true class TPL<T*>;   // #1
+template<class T> requires false class TPL<T*>;  // #2 error here
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12a.C 
b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12a.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..18e67f70944
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12a.C
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+// PR c++/96363
+// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
+// A version of concepts-partial-spec12.C where the primary template is
+// constrained.
+
+template<class T> concept C = true;
+
+template<C T> class TPL;
+
+template<C T> requires true class TPL<T>;    // #1
+template<C T> requires false class TPL<T>;   // #2 error here
+
+template<C T> requires true class TPL<T*>;   // #1
+template<C T> requires false class TPL<T*>;  // #2 error here
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C 
b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..78f6906b1ab
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// PR c++/99501
+// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
+
+template<auto> struct X{};
+
+template<auto V> requires requires{V.a;} struct X<V>;
+template<auto V> requires requires{V.b;} struct X<V>;
+
+template<auto V> requires requires{V.a;} struct X<V> { static const bool v = 
false; };
+template<auto V> requires requires{V.b;} struct X<V> { static const bool v = 
true; };
+
+struct A  {int a; };
+static_assert(!X<A{}>::v);
+
+struct B { int b; };
+static_assert(X<B{}>::v);

Reply via email to