I think this is getting too tricky, so let's go back to your first patch
(which is OK). Sorry about the runaround.
Jason
Hi,
On 01/02/2014 10:46 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 12/27/2013 07:02 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
the same arguments. Conservatively but still more neatly than my first
try, we could maybe use same_type_ignoring_top_level_qualifiers_p in the
definition of the DERIVED_FROM_P macro?
Sure, let's do
On 01/03/2014 12:29 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
- (lookup_base ((TYPE), (PARENT), ba_any, NULL, tf_none) != NULL_TREE)
+ (lookup_base ((TYPE), (PARENT), ba_any, NULL, tf_none) != NULL_TREE \
+ || ((TYPE) NON_UNION_CLASS_TYPE_P (TYPE) \
+same_type_ignoring_top_level_qualifiers_p
On 01/03/2014 01:47 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
+ issued. If the base in incomplete, then NULL_TREE is returned. */
If T is incomplete
...even if BASE is the same type.
Jason
Hi,
On 01/03/2014 07:47 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 01/03/2014 12:29 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
- (lookup_base ((TYPE), (PARENT), ba_any, NULL, tf_none) != NULL_TREE)
+ (lookup_base ((TYPE), (PARENT), ba_any, NULL, tf_none) != NULL_TREE \
+ || ((TYPE) NON_UNION_CLASS_TYPE_P (TYPE) \
+
... something like the attached appears to work. Not sure at the moment
if it could be simplified.
Thanks,
Paolo.
Index: cp/cp-tree.h
===
--- cp/cp-tree.h(revision 206318)
+++ cp/cp-tree.h
On 12/27/2013 07:02 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
the same arguments. Conservatively but still more neatly than my first
try, we could maybe use same_type_ignoring_top_level_qualifiers_p in the
definition of the DERIVED_FROM_P macro?
Sure, let's do that. And add something about incomplete types to
Hi,
On 12/12/2013 03:19 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
I wouldn't expect it to cause problems.
Ok. Then I looked a bit into this and something is making me nervous:
lookup_base wants to return a binfo, not a type. Thus what do we do when
the type is incomplete and there is no binfo? Something like
I wouldn't expect it to cause problems.
Jason
Hmm, what if we make lookup_base handle incomplete types better?
Jason
Hi,
On 12/12/2013 05:01 AM, Jason Merrill wrote:
Hmm, what if we make lookup_base handle incomplete types better?
I'm leaving for a few days of vacations, then I can certainly look into
that, per se should be very doable. To be honest, I didn't consider that
possibility because I feared it
Hi,
noticed this while preparing some testcases for the library (but
probably Daniel pointed it out together with related issues some time
ago): if we don't handle separately identical types modulo
cv-qualifiers, we incorrectly return false for incomplete types.
Tested x86_64-linux.
12 matches
Mail list logo
