public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "mark at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/21087] [4.0/4.1 Regression] ICE in do_nonmember_using_decl
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 00:59:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050422005858.14767.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050418145002.21087.sstrasser@systemhaus-gruppe.de>
------- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2005-04-22 00:58 -------
Subject: Re: [PR c++/21087] don't keep builtin anticipated decl, override
it with actual declaration
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> When push_overloaded_decl() was passed a new declaration that matches
> a builtin decl, it would verify that the declarations matched and, if
> so, leave the existing (built-in) declaration alone.
>
> The intended behavior is to merge the built-in declaration with the
> new declaration, into the location of the built-in declaration.
>
> The problem is that duplicate_decl() doesn't perform such merging when
> the new declaration is a template decl, and then we end up with an
> overload involving the template decl and the anticipated built-in
> decl. However, overloads involving anticipated decls are something we
> try to avoid, and actually check for elsewhere.
>
> This patch fixes the code such that, if the existing decl is
> anticipated and the two decls weren't merged, we discard the built-in
> and use the new decl by itself.
>
> Bootstrapped and regtested on amd64-linux-gnu. Ok to install?
OK.
Yet another reason we should generate builtins lazily, as needed...
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21087
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-22 0:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-18 14:50 [Bug c++/21087] New: " sstrasser at systemhaus-gruppe dot de
2005-04-18 14:51 ` [Bug c++/21087] " sstrasser at systemhaus-gruppe dot de
2005-04-18 18:45 ` [Bug c++/21087] [4.0/4.1 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-18 19:04 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-19 5:28 ` aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-19 21:46 ` aoliva at redhat dot com
2005-04-21 5:06 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-22 0:59 ` mark at codesourcery dot com [this message]
2005-04-22 16:58 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-23 2:47 ` [Bug c++/21087] [4.0 " aoliva at redhat dot com
2005-04-24 17:05 ` mark at codesourcery dot com
2005-04-25 20:55 ` aoliva at gcc dot gnu dot org
2005-04-25 20:55 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050422005858.14767.qmail@sourceware.org \
--to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).