public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/114536] wrong constant evaluation of std::bit_cast for bit fields Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2024 15:41:08 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-114536-4-62WPslHpz9@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-114536-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114536 Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org, | |jason at gcc dot gnu.org, | |redi at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Adjusted testcase: namespace std { template<typename T, typename F> constexpr T bit_cast (const F& f) noexcept { return __builtin_bit_cast (T, f); } } struct A { unsigned char a : 7; }; struct B { unsigned char b; }; constexpr unsigned char c = __builtin_bit_cast (B, A{1}).b; constexpr unsigned char d = std::bit_cast <B> (A{1}).b; This shows that we diagnose correctly the c case: pr114536.C:12:58: error: accessing uninitialized member ‘B::b’ 12 | constexpr unsigned char c = __builtin_bit_cast (B, A{1}).b; | ~~~~~~~~~^ but don't diagnose when the builtin call is wrapped in another call (std::bit_cast). The reason for that is: /* The result of a constexpr function must be completely initialized. However, in C++20, a constexpr constructor doesn't necessarily have to initialize all the fields, so we don't clear CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING in order to detect reading an unitialized object in constexpr instead of value-initializing it. (reduced_constant_expression_p is expected to take care of clearing the flag.) */ if (TREE_CODE (result) == CONSTRUCTOR && (cxx_dialect < cxx20 || !DECL_CONSTRUCTOR_P (fun))) clear_no_implicit_zero (result); hunk in cxx_eval_call_expression. This is done there since PR80829 for the nested CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING, and on the outermost since r7-4090-gf64e0c029c452c9fc508adebf18d0ceb3ffdc066. If it is UB to return not completely initialized aggregate, shouldn't clear_no_implicit_zero actually diagnose it if CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING is set and not all ctor elements are initialized?
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-03 15:41 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2024-03-31 10:13 [Bug c++/114536] New: " fchelnokov at gmail dot com 2024-03-31 10:19 ` [Bug c++/114536] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-31 10:22 ` fchelnokov at gmail dot com 2024-03-31 10:25 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-31 10:26 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-31 10:27 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-03-31 19:28 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-04-03 15:41 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
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-114536-4-62WPslHpz9@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).