From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-333198-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 13771 invoked by alias); 6 Oct 2010 23:58:18 -0000
Received: (qmail 13760 invoked by uid 22791); 6 Oct 2010 23:58:17 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 06 Oct 2010 23:58:12 +0000
From: "bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/45923] New: constexpr diagnostic w/ non-literal
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-45923-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2010 23:58:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-10/txt/msg00587.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D45923

           Summary: constexpr diagnostic w/ non-literal
           Product: gcc
           Version: unknown
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: c++
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: bkoz@gcc.gnu.org


This is pretty minor, but thought I'd point it out.


struct complex=20
{
#if 0
  constexpr complex(double r, double i) : re(r), im(i) { }=20
#else
  complex(double r, double i) : re(r), im(i) { }=20
#endif
  constexpr double real() { return re; }
  double imag() const { return im; }

private:
  double re;=20
  double im;
};

constexpr complex co1(0, 1); // literal object

//constant expression data initialized  by a user-defined literal
constexpr double dd2 =3D co1.real(); // OK


with:
%$bin/H-x86_64-gcc-constexpr.20101004/bin/g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 4.6.0 20101004 (experimental)

like so:
%$bin/H-x86_64-gcc-constexpr.20101004/bin/g++ -std=3Dc++0x -c constexpr-bas=
ic.cc

gives:
constexpr-basic.cc:9:20: error: enclosing class of =E2=80=98constexpr double
complex::real() const=E2=80=99 is not a literal type

YES! Except the member function signature for real() has a superfulous "con=
st"

constexpr-basic.cc:17:27: error: the type =E2=80=98const complex=E2=80=99 o=
f constexpr variable
=E2=80=98co1=E2=80=99 is not literal

YES! Except this is more like "invalid definition of constexpr variable 'co=
1'
of non-literal type 'complex'

constexpr-basic.cc:20:33: error: =E2=80=98double complex::real() const=E2=
=80=99 is not a
constexpr function

NO!

Perhaps the last one should read:=20

constexpr-basic.cc:20:33: error: member function =E2=80=98constexpr double
complex::real()=E2=80=99 cannot be used in a constant expression with a non=
-literal
object

Or something.