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++/52320] missing destructor call after thrown exception in initializer
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 07:00:36 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-52320-4-BM2Nl3lqVu@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-52320-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52320
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
commit r10-7110-g14af5d9b19b0f4ee1d929e505e245ae5c2f6bdc6
Author: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Date: Tue Mar 10 16:05:18 2020 -0400
c++: Partially revert patch for PR66139.
The patch for 66139 exposed a long-standing bug with
split_nonconstant_init (since 4.7, apparently): initializion of individual
elements of an aggregate are not a full-expressions, but
split_nonconstant_init was making full-expressions out of them. My fix for
66139 extended the use of split_nonconstant_init, and thus the bug, to
aggregate initialization of temporaries within an expression, in which
context (PR94041) the bug is more noticeable. PR93922 is a problem with my
implementation strategy of splitting out at gimplification time,
introducing
function calls that weren't in the GENERIC. So I'm going to revert the
patch now and try again for GCC 11.
gcc/cp/ChangeLog
2020-03-10 Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
PR c++/93922
PR c++/94041
PR c++/52320
PR c++/66139
* cp-gimplify.c (cp_gimplify_init_expr): Partially revert patch for
66139: Don't split_nonconstant_init. Remove pre_p parameter.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-11 7:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-21 1:03 [Bug c++/52320] New: " mmehlich at semanticdesigns dot com
2012-02-21 8:38 ` [Bug c++/52320] " daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2012-02-21 10:49 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-02-21 10:56 ` daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com
2020-03-11 7:00 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2020-05-07 11:56 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-07-23 6:51 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-04-08 12:02 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-07 0:24 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-07 0:30 ` jason at gcc dot gnu.org
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-52320-4-BM2Nl3lqVu@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: link
Be 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).