public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/90679] Template specialization with const: “ambiguous template instantiation” error
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 16:40:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-90679-4-OIgbFpKSJy@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-90679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90679

--- Comment #2 from GCC Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka <ppalka@gcc.gnu.org>:

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:0a37463758dabc9647fa3d675dffdf43a737035d

commit r14-6715-g0a37463758dabc9647fa3d675dffdf43a737035d
Author: Patrick Palka <ppalka@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue Dec 19 11:40:15 2023 -0500

    c++: partial ordering and dep alias tmpl specs [PR90679]

    During partial ordering, we want to look through dependent alias
    template specializations within template arguments and otherwise
    treat them as opaque in other contexts (see e.g. r7-7116-g0c942f3edab108
    and r11-7011-g6e0a231a4aa240).  To that end template_args_equal was
    given a partial_order flag that controls this behavior.  This flag
    does the right thing when a dependent alias template specialization
    appears as template argument of the partial specialization, e.g. in

      template<class T, class...> using first_t = T;
      template<class T> struct traits;
      template<class T> struct traits<first_t<T, T&>> { }; // #1
      template<class T> struct traits<first_t<const T, T&>> { }; // #2

    we correctly consider #2 to be more specialized than #1.  But if the
    alias specialization appears as a nested template argument of another
    class template specialization, e.g. in

      template<class T> struct traits<A<first_t<T, T&>>> { }; // #1
      template<class T> struct traits<A<first_t<const T, T&>>> { }; // #2

    then we incorrectly consider #1 and #2 to be unordered.  This is because

      1. we don't propagate the flag to recursive template_args_equal calls
      2. we don't use structural equality for class template specializations
         written in terms of dependent alias template specializations

    This patch fixes the first issue by turning the partial_order flag into
    a global.  This patch fixes the second issue by making us propagate
    structural equality appropriately when building a class template
    specialization.  In passing this patch also improves hashing of
    specializations that use structural equality.

            PR c++/90679

    gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

            * cp-tree.h (comp_template_args): Remove partial_order parameter.
            (template_args_equal): Likewise.
            * pt.cc (comparing_for_partial_ordering): New global flag.
            (iterative_hash_template_arg) <case tcc_type>: Hash the template
            and arguments for specializations that use structural equality.
            (template_args_equal): Remove partial order parameter and
            use comparing_for_partial_ordering instead.
            (comp_template_args): Likewise.
            (comp_template_args_porder): Set comparing_for_partial_ordering
            instead.  Make static.
            (any_template_arguments_need_structural_equality_p): Return true
            for an argument that's a dependent alias template specialization
            or a class template specialization that itself needs structural
            equality.
            * tree.cc (cp_tree_equal) <case TREE_VEC>: Adjust call to
            comp_template_args.

    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

            * g++.dg/cpp0x/alias-decl-75a.C: New test.
            * g++.dg/cpp0x/alias-decl-75b.C: New test.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-12-19 16:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <bug-90679-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2023-12-19 16:40 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-12-19 16:40 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2023-12-19 16:43 ` ppalka 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-90679-4-OIgbFpKSJy@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).