public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/105491] [10/11/12/13 Regression] Usage of __constinit with -std=c++11 does is rejected
Date: Mon, 09 May 2022 13:53:50 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-105491-4-XmxVOkDcWk@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-105491-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105491

--- Comment #8 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:0c7bce0ac184c057bacad9c8e615ce82923835fd

commit r13-211-g0c7bce0ac184c057bacad9c8e615ce82923835fd
Author: Patrick Palka <ppalka@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon May 9 09:53:27 2022 -0400

    c++: constexpr init of union sub-aggr w/ base [PR105491]

    Here ever since r10-7313-gb599bf9d6d1e18, reduced_constant_expression_p
    in C++11/14 is rejecting the marked sub-aggregate initializer (of type S)

      W w = {.D.2445={.s={.D.2387={.m=0}, .b=0}}};
                         ^
    ultimately because said initializer has CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING set,
    hence the function must verify that all fields of S are initialized.
    And before C++17 it doesn't expect to see base class fields (since
    next_initializable_field skips over them), so the presence thereof
    causes r_c_e_p to return false.

    The reason r10-7313-gb599bf9d6d1e18 causes this is because in that
    commit we began using CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING to precisely track whether
    we're in middle of activating a union member.  This ends up affecting
    clear_no_implicit_zero, which recurses into sub-aggregate initializers
    only if the outer initializer has CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING set.  After
    that commit, the outer union initializer above no longer has the flag
    set at this point and so clear_no_implicit_zero no longer recurses into
    the marked inner initializer.

    But arguably r_c_e_p should be able to accept the marked initializer
    regardless of whether CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING is set.  The primary bug
    therefore seems to be that r_c_e_p relies on next_initializable_field
    which skips over base class fields in C++11/14.  To fix this, this patch
    introduces a new helper function next_subobject_field which is like
    next_initializable_field except that it never skips base class fields,
    and makes r_c_e_p use it.  This patch then renames next_initializable_field
    to next_aggregate_field (and makes it skip over vptr fields again).

            PR c++/105491

    gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

            * call.cc (field_in_pset): Adjust after next_initializable_field
            renaming.
            (build_aggr_conv): Likewise.
            (convert_like_internal): Likewise.
            (type_has_extended_temps): Likewise.
            * class.cc (default_init_uninitialized_part): Likewise.
            (finish_struct): Likewise.
            * constexpr.cc (cx_check_missing_mem_inits): Likewise.
            (reduced_constant_expression_p): Use next_subobject_field
            instead.
            * cp-gimplify.cc (get_source_location_impl_type): Adjust after
            next_initializable_field renaming.
            (fold_builtin_source_location): Likewise.
            * cp-tree.h (next_initializable_field): Rename to ...
            (next_aggregate_field): ... this.
            (next_subobject_field): Declare.
            * decl.cc (next_aggregate_field): Renamed from ...
            (next_initializable_field): ... this.  Skip over vptr fields
            again.
            (next_subobject_field): Define.
            (reshape_init_class): Adjust after next_initializable_field
            renaming.
            * init.cc (build_value_init_noctor): Likewise.
            (emit_mem_initializers): Likewise.
            * lambda.cc (build_capture_proxy): Likewise.
            * method.cc (build_comparison_op): Likewise.
            * pt.cc (maybe_aggr_guide): Likewise.
            * tree.cc (structural_type_p): Likewise.
            * typeck2.cc (split_nonconstant_init_1): Likewise.
            (digest_init_r): Likewise.

    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

            * g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-union7.C: New test.
            * g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-union7a.C: New test.
            * g++.dg/cpp2a/constinit17.C: New test.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-05-09 13:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <bug-105491-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2022-05-05 11:55 ` [Bug c++/105491] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-05 14:38 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-05 14:48 ` [Bug c++/105491] [10/11/12/13 Regression] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-05 14:51 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-05 14:57 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-05 14:58 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-05 15:01 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-06 13:47 ` ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-09 13:53 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2022-05-16  8:46 ` [Bug c++/105491] [10/11/12 " marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-01 12:51 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-01 12:53 ` [Bug c++/105491] [10/11 " ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-06-28 10:49 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-21 15:05 ` ppalka 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-105491-4-XmxVOkDcWk@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: 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).