On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 10:52:04AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 9/1/23 13:23, Marek Polacek wrote: > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk? > > > > -- >8 -- > > > > In the review of P2564: > > <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/628747.html> > > it turned out that in order to correctly handle an example in the paper, > > we should stop doing immediate evaluation in build_over_call and > > bot_replace, and instead do it in cp_fold_r. This patch does that. > > > > Another benefit is that this is a pretty significant simplification, at > > least in my opinion. Also, this fixes the c++/110997 ICE (but the test > > doesn't compile yet). > > > > The main drawback seems to be that cp_fold_r doesn't process as much > > code as we did before: uninstantiated templates > > That's acceptable, it's an optional diagnostic. > > > and things like "false ? foo () : 1". > > This is a problem. Maybe we want cp_fold_r to recurse into the arms of a > COND_EXPR before folding them away? Maybe only if we know we've seen an > immediate function?
Unfortunately we had already thrown the dead branch away when we got to cp_fold_r. I wonder if we have to adjust cxx_eval_conditional_expression to call cp_fold_r on the dead branch too, perhaps with a new ff_ flag to skip the whole second switch in cp_fold_r? But then it's possible that the in_immediate_context checks have to stay. [ I'll address the rest later. ] Marek
