From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-384263-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 30270 invoked by alias); 22 Feb 2012 12:56:23 -0000
Received: (qmail 30258 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Feb 2012 12:56:22 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.9 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, 22 Feb 2012 12:55:35 +0000
From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/52339] using delete ptr1->ptr2 where ptr2 destructor deletes a const ptr1 fails
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 13:07:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: major
X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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-52339-4-dnjMco0uqY@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-52339-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-52339-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
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: 2012-02/txt/msg02197.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=52339

--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-02-22 12:48:04 UTC ---
    b = b.0;
    a = b->a;
    D.2361 = a->b;
    if (D.2361 != 0B) goto <D.2362>; else goto <D.2363>;
    <D.2362>:
    D.2364 = a->b;
    B::~B (D.2364);
    D.2365 = a->b;
    operator delete (D.2365);

which is indeed as if written like:

  a->b->~B();
  operator delete(a->b); // a is already deleted


if 'a' is not a pointer-to-const then instead you get

    b = b.0;
    a = b->a;
    D.2361 = a->b;
    if (D.2361 != 0B) goto <D.2362>; else goto <D.2363>;
    <D.2362>:
    B::~B (D.2361);
    operator delete (D.2361);

calling the destructor and operator delete directly on the value of a->b