public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug c++/94616] New: Incorrect destruction for partially built objects
@ 2020-04-16 9:58 stephane.zimmermann@trust-in-soft.com
2020-04-16 10:07 ` [Bug c++/94616] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 more replies)
0 siblings, 7 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: stephane.zimmermann@trust-in-soft.com @ 2020-04-16 9:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94616
Bug ID: 94616
Summary: Incorrect destruction for partially built objects
Product: gcc
Version: 7.5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: stephane.zimmermann@trust-in-soft.com
Target Milestone: ---
Created attachment 48286
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=48286&action=edit
Test file
With the attached file "test.cpp":
extern "C" int printf(const char *, ...);
struct Bar {
Bar(int n) {
printf("Bar(%d)\n", n);
if (n > 0)
throw 2;
}
~Bar() { printf("~Bar\n"); }
};
struct Foo {
Bar b1 = 0;
Bar b2 = 1;
Foo() { }
~Foo() { printf("~Foo()"); }
};
int
main()
{
try {
Foo f;
} catch(int) {
printf("catch\n");
}
}
Compiling and running the program yields:
$ g++ test.cpp -fexceptions -std=c++11 && ./a.out
Bar(0)
Bar(1)
terminate called after throwing an instance of 'int'
Aborted (core dumped)
I expected this output:
Bar(0)
Bar(1)
~Bar
catch
As a consequence of n3337[except.ctor]p2:
An object of any storage duration whose initialization or destruction is
terminated by an exception will have destructors executed for all of its fully
constructed subobjects (excluding the variant members of a union-like class),
that is, for subobjects for which the principal constructor ([class.base.init])
has completed execution and the destructor has not yet begun execution.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/94616] Incorrect destruction for partially built objects
2020-04-16 9:58 [Bug c++/94616] New: Incorrect destruction for partially built objects stephane.zimmermann@trust-in-soft.com
@ 2020-04-16 10:07 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-16 10:16 ` [Bug c++/94616] [8 Regression] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-04-16 10:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94616
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Keywords| |wrong-code
Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE
Target Milestone|--- |9.0
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 7 is no longer supported, and this has already been fixed in GCC 9.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 85363 ***
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/94616] [8 Regression] Incorrect destruction for partially built objects
2020-04-16 9:58 [Bug c++/94616] New: Incorrect destruction for partially built objects stephane.zimmermann@trust-in-soft.com
2020-04-16 10:07 ` [Bug c++/94616] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-04-16 10:16 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-16 10:16 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-04-16 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94616
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|RESOLVED |NEW
Last reconfirmed| |2020-04-16
Resolution|DUPLICATE |---
Summary|Incorrect destruction for |[8 Regression] Incorrect
|partially built objects |destruction for partially
| |built objects
Known to work| |4.7.4, 9.1.0
Known to fail| |4.8.5, 4.9.4, 5.5.0, 6.5.0,
| |7.5.0, 8.4.0
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Although it was fixed by r260300 it doesn't seem to be an exact dup of PR 85363
because this one is a regression since 4.7 and fails consistently with C++11
and C++14.
Reopening, because we should consider backporting r260300 to gcc-8.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/94616] [8 Regression] Incorrect destruction for partially built objects
2020-04-16 9:58 [Bug c++/94616] New: Incorrect destruction for partially built objects stephane.zimmermann@trust-in-soft.com
2020-04-16 10:07 ` [Bug c++/94616] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-16 10:16 ` [Bug c++/94616] [8 Regression] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-04-16 10:16 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-16 10:30 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-04-16 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94616
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Target Milestone|9.0 |8.5
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/94616] [8 Regression] Incorrect destruction for partially built objects
2020-04-16 9:58 [Bug c++/94616] New: Incorrect destruction for partially built objects stephane.zimmermann@trust-in-soft.com
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-04-16 10:16 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-04-16 10:30 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-16 10:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-04-16 10:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94616
Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The regression started with Paolo's r186058:
re PR c++/50043 ([C++0x] Implement core/1123)
PR c++/50043
* class.c (deduce_noexcept_on_destructor,
deduce_noexcept_on_destructors): New.
(check_bases_and_members): Call the latter.
* decl.c (grokfndecl): Call the former.
* method.c (implicitly_declare_fn): Not static.
* cp-tree.h (deduce_noexcept_on_destructor, implicitly_declare_fn):
Declare
For gcc-4.8 and gcc-4.9 using -fPIC makes it pass, but then since gcc-5 it
fails even with -fPIC, due to Jason's r213307:
re PR lto/53808 (Undefined symbol when building a library with lto)
PR lto/53808
PR c++/61659
* pt.c (push_template_decl_real): Set DECL_COMDAT on templates.
(check_explicit_specialization): Clear it on specializations.
* decl.c (duplicate_decls, start_decl): Likewise.
(grokmethod, grokfndecl): Set DECL_COMDAT on inlines.
* method.c (implicitly_declare_fn): Set DECL_COMDAT. Determine
linkage after setting the appropriate flags.
* tree.c (decl_linkage): Don't check DECL_COMDAT.
* decl2.c (mark_needed): Mark clones.
(import_export_decl): Not here.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/94616] [8 Regression] Incorrect destruction for partially built objects
2020-04-16 9:58 [Bug c++/94616] New: Incorrect destruction for partially built objects stephane.zimmermann@trust-in-soft.com
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2020-04-16 10:30 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2020-04-16 10:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-14 13:36 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-14 13:36 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2020-04-16 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94616
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> Although it was fixed by r260300 it doesn't seem to be an exact dup of PR
> 85363 because this one is a regression since 4.7 and fails consistently with
> C++11 and C++14.
So, do we want the testcase into the testsuite then to verify we don't regress
it again?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/94616] [8 Regression] Incorrect destruction for partially built objects
2020-04-16 9:58 [Bug c++/94616] New: Incorrect destruction for partially built objects stephane.zimmermann@trust-in-soft.com
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2020-04-16 10:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-05-14 13:36 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-14 13:36 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-05-14 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94616
--- Comment #5 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The master branch has been updated by Jakub Jelinek <jakub@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3cafe627d6c8bce7e7f46bdbdef3d14e9701ce9d
commit r12-800-g3cafe627d6c8bce7e7f46bdbdef3d14e9701ce9d
Author: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Date: Fri May 14 15:34:12 2021 +0200
testsuite: Add testcase for already fixed PR [PR94616]
2021-05-14 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR c++/94616
* g++.dg/cpp0x/pr94616.C: New test.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug c++/94616] [8 Regression] Incorrect destruction for partially built objects
2020-04-16 9:58 [Bug c++/94616] New: Incorrect destruction for partially built objects stephane.zimmermann@trust-in-soft.com
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-14 13:36 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-05-14 13:36 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-05-14 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=94616
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|8.5 |9.0
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The GCC 8 branch is being closed, fixed in GCC 9.1.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-05-14 13:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-04-16 9:58 [Bug c++/94616] New: Incorrect destruction for partially built objects stephane.zimmermann@trust-in-soft.com
2020-04-16 10:07 ` [Bug c++/94616] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-16 10:16 ` [Bug c++/94616] [8 Regression] " redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-16 10:16 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-16 10:30 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2020-04-16 10:52 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-14 13:36 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-05-14 13:36 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
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).