On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 05:27:37PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On 3/21/24 17:01, Marek Polacek wrote: > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk? > > > > -- >8 -- > > Patrick noticed that my r14-9339-gdc6c3bfb59baab patch is wrong; > > we're dealing with a noexcept-spec there, not a noexcept-expr, so > > setting cp_noexcept_operand et al is incorrect. Back to the drawing > > board then. > > > > To fix noexcept84.C, we should probably avoid doing push_to_top_level > > in certain cases. Patrick suggested checking: > > > > const bool push_to_top = current_function_decl != fn; > > > > which works, but I'm not sure I follow the logic there. I also came > > up with > > > > const bool push_to_top = !decl_function_context (fn); > > > > which also works. But ultimately I went with !DECL_TEMPLATE_INSTANTIATED; > > if DECL_TEMPLATE_INSTANTIATED is set, we've already pushed to top level > > if it was necessary in instantiate_body. > > This sort of thing is what maybe_push_to_top_level is for, does that also > work?
Sadly -- and I should have mentioned that -- no. maybe_push_to_top_level asks: bool push_to_top = !(current_function_decl && !LAMBDA_FUNCTION_P (d) && decl_function_context (d) == current_function_decl); here both d and current_function_decl are test()::S::S(), and decl_function_context (d) is test(). (current_function_decl was set to test()::S::S() by an earlier push_access_scope call.) But I want it to work, and I think using maybe_ would be a way nicer fix. So what if we don't push to top level if decl_function_context is non-null? I had to add the LAMBDA_TYPE_P check though: it looks that we always have to push to top level for lambdas, but sometimes we get a lambda's TYPE_DECL, and LAMBDA_FUNCTION_P doesn't catch that. An example is lambda-nested4.C. Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk? -- >8 -- Patrick noticed that my r14-9339-gdc6c3bfb59baab patch is wrong; we're dealing with a noexcept-spec there, not a noexcept-expr, so setting cp_noexcept_operand et al is incorrect. Back to the drawing board then. To fix noexcept84.C, we should probably avoid doing push_to_top_level in certain cases. maybe_push_to_top_level didn't work here as-is, so I changed it to not push to top level if decl_function_context is non-null, when we are not dealing with a lambda. This also fixes c++/114349, introduced by r14-9339. PR c++/114349 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * name-lookup.cc (maybe_push_to_top_level): For a non-lambda, don't push to top level if decl_function_context is non-null. * pt.cc (maybe_instantiate_noexcept): Use maybe_push_to_top_level. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept85.C: New test. * g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept86.C: New test. --- gcc/cp/name-lookup.cc | 12 ++++++--- gcc/cp/pt.cc | 11 ++------- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept85.C | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept86.C | 25 +++++++++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept85.C create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept86.C diff --git a/gcc/cp/name-lookup.cc b/gcc/cp/name-lookup.cc index dce4caf8981..4b2b27bdd0d 100644 --- a/gcc/cp/name-lookup.cc +++ b/gcc/cp/name-lookup.cc @@ -8664,10 +8664,14 @@ maybe_push_to_top_level (tree d) { /* Push if D isn't function-local, or is a lambda function, for which name resolution is already done. */ - bool push_to_top - = !(current_function_decl - && !LAMBDA_FUNCTION_P (d) - && decl_function_context (d) == current_function_decl); + const bool push_to_top + = (LAMBDA_FUNCTION_P (d) + || (TREE_CODE (d) == TYPE_DECL + && TREE_TYPE (d) + && LAMBDA_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (d))) + || !current_function_decl + || (!decl_function_context (d) + && decl_function_context (d) != current_function_decl)); if (push_to_top) push_to_top_level (); diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.cc b/gcc/cp/pt.cc index 8cf0d5b7a8d..7b00a8615d2 100644 --- a/gcc/cp/pt.cc +++ b/gcc/cp/pt.cc @@ -26855,7 +26855,7 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain) } else if (push_tinst_level (fn)) { - push_to_top_level (); + const bool push_to_top = maybe_push_to_top_level (fn); push_access_scope (fn); push_deferring_access_checks (dk_no_deferred); input_location = DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (fn); @@ -26878,17 +26878,10 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain) if (orig_fn) ++processing_template_decl; - ++cp_unevaluated_operand; - ++c_inhibit_evaluation_warnings; - ++cp_noexcept_operand; /* Do deferred instantiation of the noexcept-specifier. */ noex = tsubst_expr (DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_PATTERN (noex), DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_ARGS (noex), tf_warning_or_error, fn); - --cp_unevaluated_operand; - --c_inhibit_evaluation_warnings; - --cp_noexcept_operand; - /* Build up the noexcept-specification. */ spec = build_noexcept_spec (noex, tf_warning_or_error); @@ -26898,7 +26891,7 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain) pop_deferring_access_checks (); pop_access_scope (fn); pop_tinst_level (); - pop_from_top_level (); + maybe_pop_from_top_level (push_to_top); } else spec = noexcept_false_spec; diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept85.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept85.C new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..b415bb46bc9 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept85.C @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +// PR c++/114349 +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } } + +using A = struct {}; +template <template <typename> class, typename, typename> +using B = A; +template <typename T> +using C = typename T::D; +struct E { + using D = B<C, int, A>; +}; +template <class> constexpr bool foo (A) { return false; } +template <class T> struct F { + using G = T; + using H = E; + F(const F &); + void operator=(F) noexcept(foo <G> (H::D{})); +}; +template <typename, typename, typename> +using I = F<int>; +template <typename K, typename V, typename H = K> +using J = I<K, V, H>; +struct K { + typedef J<long, char> L; + L k; + K(); +}; +struct M { + bool bar () const; + K::L m; +}; +K n; +bool M::bar () const { n.k = m; return true; } diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept86.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept86.C new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..2d040c090f5 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept86.C @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +// PR c++/114349 +// { dg-do compile { target c++14 } } + +struct B +{ + int i; +}; + +template <bool BA> +void +goo () +{ + constexpr bool is_yes = BA; + struct C + { + static auto g(B b) noexcept(is_yes) { } + }; + C::g({}); +} + +void +x () +{ + goo<false>(); +} base-commit: 65b7d1862e11784a0ce67ab758e06dd8aa65b181 -- 2.44.0