[Bug c++/67104] Constant expression factory function initializes std::array with static storage duration strangely

["trippels at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8", Size: 3958 bytes --]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67104

Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2015-08-03
                 CC|                            |trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1

--- Comment #4 from Markus Trippelsdorf <trippels at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
markus@x4 tmp % cat te3.ii
namespace std
{
typedef int size_t;
template <typename _Tp, int _Nm> struct A
{
  typedef int _Type[_Nm];
  static constexpr _Tp
  _S_ref (const _Type __t, size_t)
  {
    return __t[0];
  }
};
template <typename, int _Nm> struct array
{
  typedef int const_reference;
  typedef int size_type;
  typedef A<int, _Nm> _AT_Type;
  typename _AT_Type::_Type _M_elems;
  constexpr const_reference operator[](size_type) const
  {
    return _AT_Type::_S_ref (_M_elems, 0);
  }
};
}

constexpr auto make_array (int val)
{
  std::array<int, 2> result{ val, 0 };
  return result;
}

constexpr auto numbers_static = make_array (1);
int
main ()
{
  static_assert (numbers_static[0], "");
}

markus@x4 tmp % clang++ -std=c++14 te3.ii
markus@x4 tmp % g++ -std=c++14 te3.ii
te3.ii: In function ‘int main()’:
te3.ii:36:3: error: static assertion failed: 
   static_assert (numbers_static[0], "");
   ^
>From gcc-bugs-return-493987-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org Mon Aug 03 18:35:23 2015
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-493987-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Delivered-To: listarch-gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 124514 invoked by alias); 3 Aug 2015 18:35:23 -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
Delivered-To: mailing list gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 123993 invoked by uid 48); 3 Aug 2015 18:35:18 -0000
From: "pault at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/66079] [6 Regression] memory leak with source allocation in internal subprogram
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 18:35:00 -0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: fortran
X-Bugzilla-Version: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pault at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Resolution:
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: pault at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 6.0
X-Bugzilla-Flags:
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: attachments.created
Message-ID: <bug-66079-4-cdhrR2CnWr@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-66079-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-66079-4@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: 2015-08/txt/msg00129.txt.bz2
Content-length: 592

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?idf079

--- Comment #8 from Paul Thomas <pault at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 36113
  --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id6113&actioníit
Patch for th 5 branch

Before closing this PR, I checked and found that the 5 branch now leaks memory.

The attached fixes the memory leak but does not fix the ICEs for which the
tests have been commented out. There is already too much divergence in
trans_allocate between 5 and 6 to do any more.

What do you think about applying this patch, which bootstraps and regtests?

Paul