From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 76BD8385C426; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 22:00:10 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 76BD8385C426 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1587247210; bh=k2r1BvmwCj/HhxSQc2U4Eb+jdalPz+mNlhC/j9WpKWM=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=BZLINg8Tg3RlUb3a1brQ0jsCSbdGOsUGm/poa+FOjc5lSuKqsoUY7jFXlqDUtTDgC Oxzp1+AFq8hm4Us41HxZfjDQm9W7JfelCEhBbLkvw02gVi/2lO4REWVf1467Ej63lG 1Jt6voMHVtihNWsk7sowIbDiHVTftMk3t5C94VS4= From: "xerofoify at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/94628] [8/9/10 Regression] ICE in invalid_nonstatic_memfn_p at cp/typeck.c:1979 since r9-640-g1268ecc26fc1289b Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 22:00:10 +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: 10.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: ice-on-valid-code X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: xerofoify at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 8.5 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 22:00:10 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D94628 Nicholas Krause changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |xerofoify at gmail dot com --- Comment #5 from Nicholas Krause --- Shouldn't we also we testing for TYPE_ARGUMENT_PACK as well? Seems to be missing in the reported patch id and is not checked higher up the stack aft= er looking through the code it seems.=