[Bug c++/104025] [12 Regression] '-fcompare-debug' failure with enabled warnings since r12-6563-gb8ffa71e4271ae56
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025 Jason Merrill changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #9 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #7) > Maybe. But how? Would it push a pair of next_token, input_location ? > I think it isn't easy to recompute input_location after the rollback > otherwise. > And, I'm a little bit worried that such a change could be at this point > quite dangerous, while the above patch affects one spot that has changed, we > have lots of rollbacks in various places. Fair; doing it in saved_token_sentinel seemed like a reasonable compromise.
[Bug c++/104025] [12 Regression] '-fcompare-debug' failure with enabled warnings since r12-6563-gb8ffa71e4271ae56
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025 --- Comment #8 from CVS Commits --- The master branch has been updated by Jason Merrill : https://gcc.gnu.org/g:2aa184458a11a7ec8c1b451b8eeff458a24632bb commit r12-6703-g2aa184458a11a7ec8c1b451b8eeff458a24632bb Author: Jason Merrill Date: Mon Jan 17 17:16:38 2022 -0500 c++: input_location and lookahead [PR104025] Debug information was getting confused because input_location was different depending on whether we had looked ahead to see if the next tokens look like a template argument list. I tried resetting input_location in cp_lexer_rollback_tokens itself, but that caused regressions, so let's just do it here for now. PR c++/104025 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * parser.cc (saved_token_sentinel::rollback): Call cp_lexer_set_source_position. (~saved_token_sentinel): Call rollback. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/warn/pr104025.C: New test. Co-authored-by: Jakub Jelinek
[Bug c++/104025] [12 Regression] '-fcompare-debug' failure with enabled warnings since r12-6563-gb8ffa71e4271ae56
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025 --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek --- Maybe. But how? Would it push a pair of next_token, input_location ? I think it isn't easy to recompute input_location after the rollback otherwise. And, I'm a little bit worried that such a change could be at this point quite dangerous, while the above patch affects one spot that has changed, we have lots of rollbacks in various places. Anyway, patch passed bootstrap/regtest.
[Bug c++/104025] [12 Regression] '-fcompare-debug' failure with enabled warnings since r12-6563-gb8ffa71e4271ae56
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025 --- Comment #6 from Jason Merrill --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5) > Created attachment 52213 [details] > gcc12-pr104025.patch > > Untested fix. I think the old input_location is the right one. I think the bug is that cp_lexer_rollback_tokens isn't properly updating input_location.
[Bug c++/104025] [12 Regression] '-fcompare-debug' failure with enabled warnings since r12-6563-gb8ffa71e4271ae56
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek --- Created attachment 52213 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52213=edit gcc12-pr104025.patch Untested fix. I think the old input_location is the right one.
[Bug c++/104025] [12 Regression] '-fcompare-debug' failure with enabled warnings since r12-6563-gb8ffa71e4271ae56
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025 Jakub Jelinek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek --- Yeah, the reason that -fcompare-debug fails isn't that -g vs. -g0 would emit different line number, but that -fcompare-debug uses -w for one of the compilations so that warnings aren't emitted multiple times and so one compilation is with -Wmissing-template-keyword and one without.
[Bug c++/104025] [12 Regression] '-fcompare-debug' failure with enabled warnings since r12-6563-gb8ffa71e4271ae56
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025 Richard Biener changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P3 |P1
[Bug c++/104025] [12 Regression] '-fcompare-debug' failure with enabled warnings since r12-6563-gb8ffa71e4271ae56
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski --- Obviously removing "&& warn_missing_template_keyword" will fix the fcompare-debug but the question is which location is the more correct one?
[Bug c++/104025] [12 Regression] '-fcompare-debug' failure with enabled warnings since r12-6563-gb8ffa71e4271ae56
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104025 Martin Liška changed: What|Removed |Added Last reconfirmed||2022-01-14 Ever confirmed|0 |1 CC||anthonysharp15 at gmail dot com, ||marxin at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Summary|[12 Regression] |[12 Regression] |'-fcompare-debug' failure |'-fcompare-debug' failure |with enabled warnings |with enabled warnings since ||r12-6563-gb8ffa71e4271ae56 --- Comment #2 from Martin Liška --- Started with r12-6563-gb8ffa71e4271ae56.
