public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "delleyves at gmx dot ch" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/104785] New: Generated defaulted constexpr operator== produces wrong code Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2022 15:29:37 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-104785-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104785 Bug ID: 104785 Summary: Generated defaulted constexpr operator== produces wrong code Product: gcc Version: 11.2.1 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: delleyves at gmx dot ch Target Milestone: --- It seems that the code generated for a defaulted constexpr `operator==` for a struct that inherits a field whose type contains another such `operator==` does not take that field into account. Removing constexpr on the top-most `operator==` restores correct behaviour. Therefore, this is likely related to #102490, although that one deals with bitfields. The behaviour seems to be present on all versions of GCC supporting C++20's defaulted equality operators, I did test 10.1 through 11.2 on godbolt. In the following example (godbolt link: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/7nE67fKxc), the result is wrong only for the `D` type: #include <iostream> struct A { int a; [[nodiscard]] constexpr bool operator==(const A&) const = default; }; struct B { A a; int b; [[nodiscard]] constexpr bool operator==(const B&) const = default; }; struct C : B { int c; [[nodiscard]] bool operator==(const C&) const = default; }; struct D : B { int d; [[nodiscard]] constexpr bool operator==(const D&) const = default; }; std::ostream &operator<<(std::ostream &os, const A &a) { os << "A("<<a.a<<")"; return os; } std::ostream &operator<<(std::ostream &os, const B &b) { os << "B("<<b.a<<", "<<b.b<<")"; return os; } std::ostream &operator<<(std::ostream &os, const C &c) { os << "C("<<c.a<<", "<<c.b<<", "<<c.c<<")"; return os; } std::ostream &operator<<(std::ostream &os, const D &d) { os << "D("<<d.a<<", "<<d.b<<", "<<d.d<<")"; return os; } int main() { A a1{1}, a2{2}; B b1{a1,2}, b2{a2,2}; C c1{b1,3}, c2{b2,3}; D d1{b1,3}, d2{b2,3}; #define CHECK(x,y) std::cout << x << " == " << y << "? " << ((x==y) ? "true" : "false") << std::endl; CHECK(a1,a2); CHECK(b1,b2); CHECK(c1,c2); CHECK(d1,d2); }
next reply other threads:[~2022-03-04 15:29 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-03-04 15:29 delleyves at gmx dot ch [this message] 2022-03-05 4:43 ` [Bug c++/104785] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2022-03-05 4:45 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.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=bug-104785-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --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: linkBe 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).