From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
 id 4FCEF3857817; Fri, 21 Jan 2022 14:27:33 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 4FCEF3857817
From: "ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/104111] Concept evaluation depends on context where it was
 first checked
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 14:27:33 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: accepts-invalid, rejects-valid, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.3
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc
Message-ID: <bug-104111-4-EUd2jvlmzp@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-104111-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-104111-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 14:27:33 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D104111

Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jason at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
> because concept-id evaluation shall not depend on the context.

One consequence of making this change to concept-id evaluation would be that
for:

  template<class T> void f() requires (!C<T>);

during constraint checking for say f<int>(), we no longer evaluate C<int> (=
as
part of evaluation of the atomic constraint !C<T>) in the access context of=
 f,
which seems surprising to me.

CC'ing Jason for guidance.=