[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 --- Comment #23 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-15 15:07:25 UTC --- (In reply to comment #22) Can one of you please add a note to gcc-4.7/changes.html to reflect the ABI changes between 4.7.1 and 4.7.2? Thanks. Done: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-07/msg00584.html
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #17 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-13 09:00:05 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Fri Jul 13 08:59:58 2012 New Revision: 189456 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=189456 Log: 2012-07-13 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com PR libstdc++/53657 * include/bits/stl_pair.h (pair::pair(pair)): Declare defaulted, per C++11. * include/bits/stl_map.h (map::insert(_Pair), map::insert (const_iterator, _Pair)): Constrain with std::is_constructible, per LWG2005. * include/bits/stl_multimap.h (multimap::insert(_Pair), multimap::insert(const_iterator, _Pair)): Likewise. * include/bits/hashtable_policy.h (_Insert::insert(_Pair), _Insert::insert(const_iterator, _Pair)): Likewise. * include/debug/unordered_map: Adjust. * include/debug/map.h: Likewise. * include/debug/multimap.h: Likewise. * include/profile/unordered_map: Likewise. * include/profile/map.h: Likewise. * include/profile/multimap.h: Likewise. Modified: trunk/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/hashtable_policy.h trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_map.h trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_multimap.h trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_pair.h trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/map.h trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/multimap.h trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/unordered_map trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/profile/map.h trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/profile/multimap.h trunk/libstdc++-v3/include/profile/unordered_map --- Comment #18 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-13 09:00:24 UTC --- Author: paolo Date: Fri Jul 13 09:00:18 2012 New Revision: 189457 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=189457 Log: 2012-07-13 Paolo Carlini paolo.carl...@oracle.com PR libstdc++/53657 * include/bits/stl_pair.h (pair::pair(pair)): Declare defaulted, per C++11. * include/bits/stl_map.h (map::insert(_Pair), map::insert (const_iterator, _Pair)): Constrain with std::is_constructible, per LWG2005. * include/bits/stl_multimap.h (multimap::insert(_Pair), multimap::insert(const_iterator, _Pair)): Likewise. * include/bits/hashtable.h (_Hashtable::insert(_Pair), _Hashtable::insert(const_iterator, _Pair)): Likewise. * include/debug/unordered_map: Adjust. * include/debug/map.h: Likewise. * include/debug/multimap.h: Likewise. * include/profile/unordered_map: Likewise. * include/profile/map.h: Likewise. * include/profile/multimap.h: Likewise. Modified: branches/gcc-4_7-branch/libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog branches/gcc-4_7-branch/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/hashtable.h branches/gcc-4_7-branch/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_map.h branches/gcc-4_7-branch/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_multimap.h branches/gcc-4_7-branch/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_pair.h branches/gcc-4_7-branch/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/map.h branches/gcc-4_7-branch/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/multimap.h branches/gcc-4_7-branch/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/unordered_map branches/gcc-4_7-branch/libstdc++-v3/include/profile/map.h branches/gcc-4_7-branch/libstdc++-v3/include/profile/multimap.h branches/gcc-4_7-branch/libstdc++-v3/include/profile/unordered_map --- Comment #19 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-07-13 09:04:33 UTC --- Fixed mainline and 4.7.2.
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #20 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-07-13 12:38:03 UTC --- Thanks Paolo and Jonathan and Jason, this looks ready to go from an ABI standpoint for 4.7.2. Paolo, do we need to add any of the testcases in this PR to track regressions here? Or at least make this less fragile as FE/lib changes going forward?
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 --- Comment #21 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-07-13 12:43:31 UTC --- I think that if something regresses we immediately see regressions in the v3 testsuite (Comment 5 is distilled from it).
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 --- Comment #22 from rguenther at suse dot de rguenther at suse dot de 2012-07-13 12:53:51 UTC --- On Fri, 13 Jul 2012, paolo.carlini at oracle dot com wrote: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 --- Comment #21 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-07-13 12:43:31 UTC --- I think that if something regresses we immediately see regressions in the v3 testsuite (Comment 5 is distilled from it). Can one of you please add a note to gcc-4.7/changes.html to reflect the ABI changes between 4.7.1 and 4.7.2? Thanks.
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jwakely.gcc at gmail dot ||com --- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-06-20 15:04:11 UTC --- If I do the straightforward change (pair(pair) defaulted + insert(_Pair) using is_constructible), there are problems in the testsuite for situations well exemplified by 23_containers/unordered_map/insert/map_range.cc (many instances in the exception/ testcases too and elsewhere, but hidden below a lot of templates, grrr): the defaulted pair move constructor is implicitly deleted and the testcase doesn't compile. Is that expected and the testcase defective? Maybe yes. We have things like: typedef std::pairconst std::string, int Pair; Pair A = Pair(red, 5); if I remove the const from Pair it works.
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 --- Comment #10 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com 2012-06-20 15:10:16 UTC --- (In reply to comment #9) Yes, this is to be expected, because gcc currently does not implement http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_active.html#1402 I think fixing that issue depends on that DR (Sorry, I forgot to mention that in my private communication to you).
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 --- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-06-20 15:15:46 UTC --- Ah, thanks Daniel. Thus I guess we should do this change and then also implement core/1402 ASAP, because otherwise in many circumstances the users would not be that happy. Are you willing to open a GCC Bugzilla with Jason too in CC about core/1402 and referring to this one?
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-20
15:20:29 UTC ---
Possibly a front end bug, not sure.
Here's a reduced form that G++ rejects, Clang accepts:
templatetypename T
struct pair
{
constexpr pair(const pair) = default;
pair(pair) = default;
pair() : t() { }
T t;
};
struct string {
string(const string) { }
string(string) = default;
string() = default;
};
int main()
{
typedef pairconst string P;
P p[] = { P(), P() };
}
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 --- Comment #13 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-06-20 15:23:06 UTC --- By the way, the more I look into this issue the more I come to the conclusion that making sure pair(pair) is defaulted (which has ABI implications) means doing quite a number of non-trivial changes both in lib and front-end beyond the letter of C++11. I vaguely knew that for a while, guys... To good news is that defaulting + insert(Pair) using is_constructible + DR 1402 in the front-end should lead to a clean library testsuite, I don't see any other issues when regression testing the first 2 items.
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 --- Comment #14 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-06-20 15:26:06 UTC --- Thanks for the no-include testcase Jon. Thus are we talking about the core defect mentioned by Daniel? Should move this discussion to a C++ issue.
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 --- Comment #14 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-06-20 15:26:06 UTC --- Thanks for the no-include testcase Jon. Thus are we talking about the core defect mentioned by Daniel? Should move this discussion to a C++ issue. --- Comment #15 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com 2012-06-20 15:26:52 UTC --- (In reply to comment #11) Are you willing to open a GCC Bugzilla with Jason too in CC about core/1402 and referring to this one? Yes, I do that this evening.
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 --- Comment #16 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-20 15:30:39 UTC --- (In reply to comment #14) Thanks for the no-include testcase Jon. Thus are we talking about the core defect mentioned by Daniel? Should move this discussion to a C++ issue. Yes, same issue, I'd just written it before I saw the replies and got a mid-air collision, so I hit submit only my new comment.
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC|jason at gcc dot gnu.org, | |paolo.carlini at oracle dot | |com | AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |paolo.carlini at oracle dot |gnu.org |com --- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-06-19 09:30:00 UTC --- Ah, great, Daniel pointed out in private mail that the latest update of LWG 2005 indeed specifies is_constructible as I seemed to remember: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#2005
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression][C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.5.1, 4.6.0 Target Milestone|--- |4.7.2 Summary|[C++11] pair(pair) move |[4.7/4.8 Regression][C++11] |constructor is non-trivial |pair(pair) move ||constructor is non-trivial Known to fail||4.5.0 --- Comment #4 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 09:39:58 UTC --- Thanks.
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Known to work||4.5.1, 4.6.1 Target Milestone|--- |4.7.2 Summary|[C++11] pair(pair) move |[4.7/4.8 Regression] |constructor is non-trivial |[C++11] pair(pair) move ||constructor is non-trivial Known to fail||4.5.0
[Bug libstdc++/53657] [4.7/4.8 Regression] [C++11] pair(pair) move constructor is non-trivial
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53657 Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||org.gnu.gcc.bugtracker at ||sotecware dot net --- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-06-14 13:15:30 UTC --- *** Bug 53455 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
