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 EAD363858D39; Mon, 27 Feb 2023 19:56:50 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org EAD363858D39
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1677527810;
	bh=4bNgeXYMyDUbSV76mL539ycyRGwd3Ycoquf2WhKwqYE=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:From;
	b=xVxD3uLQS0BcjzcfpV9yH7woauRKfc2AY3mqFDaciFOQoipwtPkImOnNhEjVlUdmL
	 tmDO2Xml0W6ey9bEi8jKfVVX7YSEliEGwDNT/6flEvnBps7+AiwwsQz4CJEkiAyhZm
	 aQ+T5mZGGepgHNJ1mOAzSttYTKxNIwqiDeCFlTCw=
From: "piotr5 at netscape dot net" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/108955] New: Ultimate++ fails with its specialized
 AssertMoveable
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 19:56:50 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 13.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: piotr5 at netscape dot net
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status
 bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter target_milestone
 attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-108955-4@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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D108955

            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=3D54548&action=3Dedit
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 ha=
d 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 =3D 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 =3D 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 di=
d my
minimal example work? why is there no such problem with gcc-12?=