public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/104225] New: accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization
@ 2022-01-25 15:45 ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-25 15:48 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11/12 Regression] " ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 more replies)
0 siblings, 9 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-25 15:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104225
Bug ID: 104225
Summary: accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted
implicit default constructor of class specialization
Product: gcc
Version: 12.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone: ---
The following testcase compiles without error, but should be rejected because
it uses B's deleted default constructor:
class A { ~A(); };
template <class> class B { A f = 1; };
int main() {
new B<int>;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11/12 Regression] accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization
2022-01-25 15:45 [Bug c++/104225] New: accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-25 15:48 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-25 20:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-25 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104225
Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2022-01-25
Ever confirmed|0 |1
CC| |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
Known to work| |8.5.0
Summary|accepts-invalid new |[9/10/11/12 Regression]
|expression that uses |accepts-invalid new
|deleted implicit default |expression that uses
|constructor of class |deleted implicit default
|specialization |constructor of class
| |specialization
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
See Also| |https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzill
| |a/show_bug.cgi?id=101532
Target Milestone|--- |9.5
Keywords| |accepts-invalid
Known to fail| |10.3.0, 11.2.0, 12.0, 9.4.0
--- Comment #1 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Started with r9-6097.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11/12 Regression] accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization
2022-01-25 15:45 [Bug c++/104225] New: accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-25 15:48 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11/12 Regression] " ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-25 20:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-25 20:06 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-25 20:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104225
--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka <ppalka@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:bc90dd0ecf02e11d47d1af7f627e2e2acaa40106
commit r12-6863-gbc90dd0ecf02e11d47d1af7f627e2e2acaa40106
Author: Patrick Palka <ppalka@redhat.com>
Date: Tue Jan 25 15:04:49 2022 -0500
c++: deleted fn and noexcept inst [PR101532, PR104225]
Here when attempting to use B's implicitly deleted default constructor,
mark_used rightfully returns false, but for the wrong reason: it
tries to instantiate the synthesized noexcept specifier which then only
silently fails because get_defaulted_eh_spec suppresses diagnostics
for deleted functions. This lack of diagnostics causes us to crash on
the first testcase below (thanks to the assert in finish_expr_stmt), and
silently accept the second testcase.
To fix this, this patch makes mark_used avoid attempting to instantiate
the noexcept specifier of a deleted function, so that we'll instead
directly reject (and diagnose) the function due to its deletedness.
PR c++/101532
PR c++/104225
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* decl2.cc (mark_used): Don't consider maybe_instantiate_noexcept
on a deleted function.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template21.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template21a.C: New test.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11/12 Regression] accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization
2022-01-25 15:45 [Bug c++/104225] New: accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-25 15:48 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11/12 Regression] " ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-25 20:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-25 20:06 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-25 20:07 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11 " ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-25 20:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104225
Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11 Regression] accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization
2022-01-25 15:45 [Bug c++/104225] New: accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-25 20:06 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-25 20:07 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-26 7:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-25 20:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104225
Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |NEW
Summary|[9/10/11/12 Regression] |[9/10/11 Regression]
|accepts-invalid new |accepts-invalid new
|expression that uses |expression that uses
|deleted implicit default |deleted implicit default
|constructor of class |constructor of class
|specialization |specialization
Resolution|FIXED |---
--- Comment #4 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #3)
> Fixed.
... for GCC 12 so far.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11 Regression] accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization
2022-01-25 15:45 [Bug c++/104225] New: accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-25 20:07 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11 " ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-26 7:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-12 23:44 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-26 7:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104225
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Known to work| |12.0
Known to fail|12.0 |
Priority|P3 |P2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11 Regression] accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization
2022-01-25 15:45 [Bug c++/104225] New: accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-26 7:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-04-12 23:44 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-09 23:32 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9/10 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-04-12 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104225
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
<ppalka@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:1429db66619d2b801ac0b586b5eed74ab54a35b0
commit r11-9840-g1429db66619d2b801ac0b586b5eed74ab54a35b0
Author: Patrick Palka <ppalka@redhat.com>
Date: Tue Jan 25 15:04:49 2022 -0500
c++: deleted fn and noexcept inst [PR101532, PR104225]
Here when attempting to use B's implicitly deleted default constructor,
mark_used rightfully returns false, but for the wrong reason: it
tries to instantiate the synthesized noexcept specifier which then only
silently fails because get_defaulted_eh_spec suppresses diagnostics
for deleted functions. This lack of diagnostics causes us to crash on
the first testcase below (thanks to the assert in finish_expr_stmt), and
silently accept the second testcase.
To fix this, this patch makes mark_used avoid attempting to instantiate
the noexcept specifier of a deleted function, so that we'll instead
directly reject (and diagnose) the function due to its deletedness.
PR c++/101532
PR c++/104225
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* decl2.c (mark_used): Don't consider maybe_instantiate_noexcept
on a deleted function.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template21.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template21a.C: New test.
(cherry picked from commit bc90dd0ecf02e11d47d1af7f627e2e2acaa40106)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/104225] [9/10 Regression] accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization
2022-01-25 15:45 [Bug c++/104225] New: accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2022-04-12 23:44 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-05-09 23:32 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-11 14:59 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-11 15:05 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-05-09 23:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104225
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
<ppalka@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:ad0398474aff6bb7726e9117711b0a111a4b69e7
commit r10-10602-gad0398474aff6bb7726e9117711b0a111a4b69e7
Author: Patrick Palka <ppalka@redhat.com>
Date: Tue Jan 25 15:04:49 2022 -0500
c++: deleted fn and noexcept inst [PR101532, PR104225]
Here when attempting to use B's implicitly deleted default constructor,
mark_used rightfully returns false, but for the wrong reason: it
tries to instantiate the synthesized noexcept specifier which then only
silently fails because get_defaulted_eh_spec suppresses diagnostics
for deleted functions. This lack of diagnostics causes us to crash on
the first testcase below (thanks to the assert in finish_expr_stmt), and
silently accept the second testcase.
To fix this, this patch makes mark_used avoid attempting to instantiate
the noexcept specifier of a deleted function, so that we'll instead
directly reject (and diagnose) the function due to its deletedness.
PR c++/101532
PR c++/104225
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* decl2.c (mark_used): Don't consider maybe_instantiate_noexcept
on a deleted function.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template21.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template21a.C: New test.
(cherry picked from commit bc90dd0ecf02e11d47d1af7f627e2e2acaa40106)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/104225] [9 Regression] accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization
2022-01-25 15:45 [Bug c++/104225] New: accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2022-05-09 23:32 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9/10 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-05-11 14:59 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-11 15:05 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-05-11 14:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104225
--- Comment #7 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-9 branch has been updated by Patrick Palka
<ppalka@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:4df77364f7fd9ce88c012843fff124346e4d3c06
commit r9-10155-g4df77364f7fd9ce88c012843fff124346e4d3c06
Author: Patrick Palka <ppalka@redhat.com>
Date: Tue Jan 25 15:04:49 2022 -0500
c++: deleted fn and noexcept inst [PR101532, PR104225]
Here when attempting to use B's implicitly deleted default constructor,
mark_used rightfully returns false, but for the wrong reason: it
tries to instantiate the synthesized noexcept specifier which then only
silently fails because get_defaulted_eh_spec suppresses diagnostics
for deleted functions. This lack of diagnostics causes us to crash on
the first testcase below (thanks to the assert in finish_expr_stmt), and
silently accept the second testcase.
To fix this, this patch makes mark_used avoid attempting to instantiate
the noexcept specifier of a deleted function, so that we'll instead
directly reject (and diagnose) the function due to its deletedness.
PR c++/101532
PR c++/104225
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* decl2.c (mark_used): Don't consider maybe_instantiate_noexcept
on a deleted function.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template21.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/nsdmi-template21a.C: New test.
(cherry picked from commit bc90dd0ecf02e11d47d1af7f627e2e2acaa40106)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/104225] [9 Regression] accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization
2022-01-25 15:45 [Bug c++/104225] New: accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2022-05-11 14:59 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-05-11 15:05 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
8 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-05-11 15:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104225
Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Comment #8 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed for 9.5/10.4/11.3/12.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-05-11 15:05 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-01-25 15:45 [Bug c++/104225] New: accepts-invalid new expression that uses deleted implicit default constructor of class specialization ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-25 15:48 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11/12 Regression] " ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-25 20:05 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-25 20:06 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-25 20:07 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9/10/11 " ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-26 7:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-04-12 23:44 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-09 23:32 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9/10 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-11 14:59 ` [Bug c++/104225] [9 " cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-11 15:05 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
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).