The standard says, as we quote in the comment just above, that if we don't
find operator new in the allocated type, it should be looked up in the
global scope. This is specifically ::, not just any namespace, and we
already give an error for an operator new declared in any other namespace.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk.
PR c++/98249
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* call.cc (build_operator_new_call): Just look in ::.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/lookup/new3.C: New test.
---
gcc/cp/call.cc | 3 +--
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lookup/new3.C | 10 ++++++++++
2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lookup/new3.C
diff --git a/gcc/cp/call.cc b/gcc/cp/call.cc
index 73fede5a3df..3a8d7e4b131 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/call.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/call.cc
@@ -4899,8 +4899,7 @@ build_operator_new_call (tree fnname, vec<tree, va_gc>
**args,
up in the global scope.
we disregard block-scope declarations of "operator new". */
- fns = lookup_name (fnname, LOOK_where::NAMESPACE);
- fns = lookup_arg_dependent (fnname, fns, *args);
+ fns = lookup_qualified_name (global_namespace, fnname);
if (align_arg)
{
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lookup/new3.C
b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lookup/new3.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..36afb5b48e2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/lookup/new3.C
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+// PR c++/98249
+
+#include <new>
+struct Incomplete;
+template<class T> struct Holder { T t; };
+Holder<Incomplete> *p;
+void test() {
+ ::new (p) int;
+ new (p) int;
+}
base-commit: b1124648ff8f655307f264d7b353fd68e3b03e9c
--
2.27.0
