public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/108955] New: Ultimate++ fails with its specialized AssertMoveable @ 2023-02-27 19:56 piotr5 at netscape dot net 2023-02-27 20:03 ` [Bug c++/108955] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ` (3 more replies) 0 siblings, 4 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: piotr5 at netscape dot net @ 2023-02-27 19:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108955 Bug ID: 108955 Summary: Ultimate++ fails with its specialized AssertMoveable Product: gcc Version: 13.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: piotr5 at netscape dot net Target Milestone: --- Created attachment 54548 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54548&action=edit my failed attempt at a minimal example after preprocessor I'm on gentoo with sys-devel/gcc-13.0.1_pre20230219 and tried to recompile anything using Ultimate++ from upp.sf.net and already the heaqders fail to compile. error: invalid type argument of unary '*' (have 'unsigned int') this indicates the pre-c++11 test for "unsigned int" being a moveable data-type failed. I tried to reproduce the problem with a minimal example but that had no such problems in compilation. the way it's supposed to work is Core/Topt.h: ``` template <class T> inline void AssertMoveablePtr(T, T) {} template <class T> inline void AssertMoveable0(T *t) { AssertMoveablePtr(&**t, *t); } // COMPILATION ERROR HERE MEANS TYPE T WAS NOT MARKED AS Moveable template <class T> struct Moveable_ { friend void AssertMoveable0(T *) {} }; template <class T> inline void AssertMoveable(T *t = 0) { if(t) AssertMoveable0(t); } #if defined(COMPILER_MSC) || defined(COMPILER_GCC) && (__GNUC__ < 4 || __GNUC_MINOR__ < 1) #define NTL_MOVEABLE(T) inline void AssertMoveable0(T *) {} #else #define NTL_MOVEABLE(T) template<> inline void AssertMoveable<T>(T *) {} #endif NTL_MOVEABLE(bool) NTL_MOVEABLE(char) NTL_MOVEABLE(signed char) NTL_MOVEABLE(unsigned char) NTL_MOVEABLE(short) NTL_MOVEABLE(unsigned short) NTL_MOVEABLE(int) NTL_MOVEABLE(unsigned int) NTL_MOVEABLE(long) NTL_MOVEABLE(unsigned long) NTL_MOVEABLE(int64) NTL_MOVEABLE(uint64) NTL_MOVEABLE(float) NTL_MOVEABLE(double) NTL_MOVEABLE(void *) NTL_MOVEABLE(const void *) ``` then in destructor for Vector there is AssertMoveable((T *)0); where T = unsigned int what is supposed to happen is that NTL_MOVEABLE expands to template<> inline void AssertMoveable<T>(T *) {} so far it works as expected. however upon encontering that AssertMoveable((T *)0); it is expanded into inline void AssertMoveable0(T *t) { AssertMoveablePtr(&**t, *t); } instead. is it because that was defined in the wrong order? but then why did my minimal example work? why is there no such problem with gcc-12? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108955] Ultimate++ fails with its specialized AssertMoveable 2023-02-27 19:56 [Bug c++/108955] New: Ultimate++ fails with its specialized AssertMoveable piotr5 at netscape dot net @ 2023-02-27 20:03 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-27 20:19 ` piotr5 at netscape dot net ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-02-27 20:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108955 Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING Last reconfirmed| |2023-02-27 --- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Can you attach the preprocessed source of the non-minimal example? Since it is not obvious what is going wrong ... ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108955] Ultimate++ fails with its specialized AssertMoveable 2023-02-27 19:56 [Bug c++/108955] New: Ultimate++ fails with its specialized AssertMoveable piotr5 at netscape dot net 2023-02-27 20:03 ` [Bug c++/108955] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-02-27 20:19 ` piotr5 at netscape dot net 2023-02-27 20:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-27 20:36 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: piotr5 at netscape dot net @ 2023-02-27 20:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108955 --- Comment #2 from piotr5 at netscape dot net --- Created attachment 54549 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=54549&action=edit gunzip then: c++-13 -c delme-E13.cxx also fails with c++-12 so the problem must be in the preprocessor... ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108955] Ultimate++ fails with its specialized AssertMoveable 2023-02-27 19:56 [Bug c++/108955] New: Ultimate++ fails with its specialized AssertMoveable piotr5 at netscape dot net 2023-02-27 20:03 ` [Bug c++/108955] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-27 20:19 ` piotr5 at netscape dot net @ 2023-02-27 20:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-27 20:36 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-02-27 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108955 Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |INVALID Status|WAITING |RESOLVED --- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The code is definitely invalid. How to fix it is to move this: template <class T> inline void AssertMoveable(T *t = 0) { if(t) AssertMoveable0(t); } Below the definitions of AssertMoveable0. (__GNUC__ < 4 || __GNUC_MINOR__ < 1) That is check is just wrong. Especially while GCC 13.0.1 is a stage 4 compiler. Maybe it should be just: __GNUC__ < 4 || (__GNUC__ == 4 && __GNUC_MINOR__ < 4) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/108955] Ultimate++ fails with its specialized AssertMoveable 2023-02-27 19:56 [Bug c++/108955] New: Ultimate++ fails with its specialized AssertMoveable piotr5 at netscape dot net ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2023-02-27 20:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-02-27 20:36 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-02-27 20:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108955 --- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #3) > The code is definitely invalid. > > How to fix it is to move this: > template <class T> > inline void AssertMoveable(T *t = 0) { if(t) AssertMoveable0(t); } > > > Below the definitions of AssertMoveable0. > (__GNUC__ < 4 || __GNUC_MINOR__ < 1) > > That is check is just wrong. Especially while GCC 13.0.1 is a stage 4 > compiler. > > Maybe it should be just: > __GNUC__ < 4 || (__GNUC__ == 4 && __GNUC_MINOR__ < 4) That is if this is GCC before GCC 4.1.0 do it differently. The reason why not many people hit this is because the first official release of a major release of GCC these days is N.1.0 and you would only hit this during the development of the trunk ... ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-02-27 20:36 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2023-02-27 19:56 [Bug c++/108955] New: Ultimate++ fails with its specialized AssertMoveable piotr5 at netscape dot net 2023-02-27 20:03 ` [Bug c++/108955] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-27 20:19 ` piotr5 at netscape dot net 2023-02-27 20:32 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-02-27 20:36 ` pinskia 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).