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 D88FE3858D38; Sat, 13 Apr 2024 01:59:22 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org D88FE3858D38
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1712973562;
	bh=nowa95w1c97GX1wBqnVtFUgReyy0w4H9Riiq72heuyE=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:From;
	b=o4Ebegi3Z7N1fOSYfXkWRV1GrItMlwq9R2F6Gq58kJr8caVx3aIIhT88cd92NMCTp
	 EtTDPzGu49o2HSv7fH9kUwuPnA9E6OkOU/BmzIoyK4PuYAvtYYutY5Bj4kvFeaj4LW
	 WMDQHCC39scCfPaZl+wQfQo7Z9Sh1XapeC0KbWHI=
From: "420 at zerberste dot es" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/114709] New: Incorrect handling of inactive union member
 access via pointer to member in constant evaluated context
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2024 01:59:22 +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: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: 420 at zerberste dot es
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
Message-ID: <bug-114709-4@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=3D114709

            Bug ID: 114709
           Summary: Incorrect handling of inactive union member access via
                    pointer to member in constant evaluated context
           Product: gcc
           Version: unknown
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: 420 at zerberste dot es
  Target Milestone: ---

According to https://standards.pydong.org/c++/class.union#general-note-1 an
inactive union member may be used to inspect the initial sequence common wi=
th
the active union member, given both are struct types. Furthermore
https://standards.pydong.org/c++/class.mem#general-26 tells us the behavior=
 of
reading a non-static member m of such a common initial sequence is _as if_ =
the
corresponding member were nominated. Since it is not expression-equivalent,=
 we
are still accessing the wrong member as far as the abstract machine is
concerned. Hence https://standards.pydong.org/c++/expr.const#5.10 still
applies.

GCC implements this correctly for the simple case. To reuse the example from
[class.mem]/26 consider this code fragment:
```cpp
struct T1 { int a, b; };
struct T2 { int c; double d; };
union U { T1 t1; T2 t2; };

consteval int f() {
  U u =3D { { 1, 2 } }; // active member is t1
  return u.t2.c;      // access through t2
}

static constexpr auto foo =3D f();
```
https://godbolt.org/z/x14n47T45

GCC correctly errors with the diagnostic=20
> accessing 'U::t2' member instead of initialized 'U::t1' member in constan=
t expression


However, consider the following code fragment:
```cpp
struct T1 { int a, b; };
struct T2 { int c; double d; };
union U { T1 t1; T2 t2; };

consteval int f() {
  U u =3D { { 1, 2 } };  // active member is t1
  return u.t2.*&T2::c; // access through t2
}

static constexpr auto foo =3D f();
```
https://godbolt.org/z/dK95jEPjq

GCC 12 up until trunk accept this code. GCC 11 and Clang don't.=