From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-489261-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 129755 invoked by alias); 18 Jun 2015 01:05:47 -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
Received: (qmail 129512 invoked by uid 48); 18 Jun 2015 01:05:42 -0000
From: "miyuki at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/66572] [6 Regression] Bogus Wlogical-op warning for operands coming from template instantiations
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 01:05:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: diagnostic
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: miyuki at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
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:
Message-ID: <bug-66572-4-OKqTMfN6TB@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66572-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66572-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SW-Source: 2015-06/txt/msg01593.txt.bz2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=66572

--- Comment #3 from Mikhail Maltsev <miyuki at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Started with r222408. The commit message says:

PR c/63357
* c-common.c (warn_logical_operator): Warn if the operands have the same
expressions.
* doc/invoke.texi: Update description of -Wlogical-op.

Apperntly, the warning about same expressions in a logical expression was added
to Wlogical-op after GCC 5.1 release (I didn't know that) and it had this
problem from the very beginning.

In warn_logical_operator we have a check:

  /* We do not warn for constants because they are typical of macro
     expansions that test for features.  */
  if (CONSTANT_CLASS_P (op_left) || CONSTANT_CLASS_P (op_right))
    return;

But in this case op_left and op_right are:
<var_decl 0x7ffff6118bd0 value
    type <boolean_type 0x7ffff6263888 bool readonly public unsigned QI
        size <integer_cst 0x7ffff610bf48 constant 8>
        unit size <integer_cst 0x7ffff610bf60 constant 1>
        align 8 symtab 0 alias set -1 canonical type 0x7ffff6263888 precision 1
min <integer_cst 0x7ffff612e1b0 0> max <integer_cst 0x7ffff612e1e0 1>>

I think it's still possible to fix this check to handle C++ boolean constants
properly (as if they were literal constants). But for general case we probably
must somehow know (e.g. add a new flag to enum tsubst_flags and pass it to
warn_logical_operator from build_new_op_1), that current expression depends on
template parameter.