C++ patch ping

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

C++ patch ping

Jakub Jelinek
Hi!

I'd like to ping
  PR87506 - https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-11/msg01758.html

You've acked the patch with the asserts but that FAILs as mentioned
in the above mail.  The following has been bootstrapped/regtested
and works, can it be committed without those asserts and let those
be handled incrementally later (though, I'm afraid I'm not familiar enough
with resolving those).

Thanks.

2018-11-21  Jakub Jelinek  <[hidden email]>

        PR c++/87506
        * constexpr.c (adjust_temp_type): Handle EMPTY_CLASS_EXPR.

        * g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-87506.C: New test.

--- gcc/cp/constexpr.c.jj 2018-11-16 21:35:34.551110868 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/constexpr.c 2018-11-19 09:35:06.880386449 +0100
@@ -1280,6 +1280,8 @@ adjust_temp_type (tree type, tree temp)
   /* Avoid wrapping an aggregate value in a NOP_EXPR.  */
   if (TREE_CODE (temp) == CONSTRUCTOR)
     return build_constructor (type, CONSTRUCTOR_ELTS (temp));
+  if (TREE_CODE (temp) == EMPTY_CLASS_EXPR)
+    return build0 (EMPTY_CLASS_EXPR, type);
   gcc_assert (scalarish_type_p (type));
   return cp_fold_convert (type, temp);
 }
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-87506.C.jj 2018-11-19 09:33:07.795341369 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-87506.C 2018-11-19 09:33:07.795341369 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+// PR c++/87506
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+
+struct A {};
+struct B { constexpr B (const A) {} };
+struct C : B { using B::B; };
+
+void
+foo ()
+{
+  C c (A{});
+}


        Jakub
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: C++ patch ping

Jason Merrill
On 12/4/18 9:47 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I'd like to ping
>    PR87506 - https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-11/msg01758.html
>
> You've acked the patch with the asserts but that FAILs as mentioned
> in the above mail.  The following has been bootstrapped/regtested
> and works, can it be committed without those asserts and let those
> be handled incrementally later (though, I'm afraid I'm not familiar enough
> with resolving those).

OK>

Jason