public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug libstdc++/99021] New: coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be noexcept
@ 2021-02-09 10:27 redbeard0531 at gmail dot com
2021-02-09 10:42 ` [Bug libstdc++/99021] " redbeard0531 at gmail dot com
` (4 more replies)
0 siblings, 5 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: redbeard0531 at gmail dot com @ 2021-02-09 10:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99021
Bug ID: 99021
Summary: coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be
noexcept
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: redbeard0531 at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
While it isn't required by the standard, it seems odd that
coroutine_handle<void>::from_address() is noexcept while the non-specialized
version isn't when they are the same code. This would also help with
clang/libstdc++ compatibility because they currently check for noexcept of
from_address() as part of validating
https://eel.is/c++draft/dcl.fct.def.coroutine#15 (I'll be filing a bug with
them about that shortly since that is leaking an internal compiler
implementation detail).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* [Bug libstdc++/99021] coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be noexcept 2021-02-09 10:27 [Bug libstdc++/99021] New: coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be noexcept redbeard0531 at gmail dot com @ 2021-02-09 10:42 ` redbeard0531 at gmail dot com 2021-02-09 12:32 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org ` (3 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: redbeard0531 at gmail dot com @ 2021-02-09 10:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99021 --- Comment #1 from Mathias Stearn <redbeard0531 at gmail dot com> --- clang bug for reference https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49109 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/99021] coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be noexcept 2021-02-09 10:27 [Bug libstdc++/99021] New: coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be noexcept redbeard0531 at gmail dot com 2021-02-09 10:42 ` [Bug libstdc++/99021] " redbeard0531 at gmail dot com @ 2021-02-09 12:32 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-02-09 13:42 ` redbeard0531 at gmail dot com ` (2 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-02-09 12:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99021 --- Comment #2 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The master branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely <redi@gcc.gnu.org>: https://gcc.gnu.org/g:26a3f288f1895a8c061c0458590542a3d2ee796a commit r11-7149-g26a3f288f1895a8c061c0458590542a3d2ee796a Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> Date: Tue Feb 9 11:23:29 2021 +0000 libstdc++: Make coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() noexcept [PR 99021] The coroutine_handle<void>::from_address(void*) version is already noexcept, and they do the same thing. Make them consistent. libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: PR libstdc++/99021 * include/std/coroutine (coroutine_handle<P>::from_address): Add noexcept. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/99021] coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be noexcept 2021-02-09 10:27 [Bug libstdc++/99021] New: coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be noexcept redbeard0531 at gmail dot com 2021-02-09 10:42 ` [Bug libstdc++/99021] " redbeard0531 at gmail dot com 2021-02-09 12:32 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-02-09 13:42 ` redbeard0531 at gmail dot com 2021-02-09 14:26 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-02-09 14:44 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: redbeard0531 at gmail dot com @ 2021-02-09 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99021 --- Comment #3 from Mathias Stearn <redbeard0531 at gmail dot com> --- Thanks for the quick fix! Any chance of a backport of this and https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/f1b6e46c417224887c2f21baa6d4c538a25fe9fb#diff-ed08df78eba81189642b4e8d670a0adb4b377db6846aecb090b4dce52a9251fa to the v10 branch? It will improve the experience of anyone using clang-based editor tooling when using libstdc++ rather than libc++. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/99021] coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be noexcept 2021-02-09 10:27 [Bug libstdc++/99021] New: coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be noexcept redbeard0531 at gmail dot com ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2021-02-09 13:42 ` redbeard0531 at gmail dot com @ 2021-02-09 14:26 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-02-09 14:44 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-02-09 14:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99021 --- Comment #4 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The releases/gcc-10 branch has been updated by Jonathan Wakely <redi@gcc.gnu.org>: https://gcc.gnu.org/g:fa183497cf25b604f5b76bc16766f30f5ec7e05b commit r10-9353-gfa183497cf25b604f5b76bc16766f30f5ec7e05b Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> Date: Tue Feb 9 11:23:29 2021 +0000 libstdc++: Make coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() noexcept [PR 99021] The coroutine_handle<void>::from_address(void*) version is already noexcept, and they do the same thing. Make them consistent. libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: PR libstdc++/99021 * include/std/coroutine (coroutine_handle<P>::from_address): Add noexcept. (cherry picked from commit 26a3f288f1895a8c061c0458590542a3d2ee796a) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Bug libstdc++/99021] coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be noexcept 2021-02-09 10:27 [Bug libstdc++/99021] New: coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be noexcept redbeard0531 at gmail dot com ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2021-02-09 14:26 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-02-09 14:44 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: redi at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-02-09 14:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-bugs https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99021 Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target Milestone|--- |10.3 Severity|normal |enhancement Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Mathias Stearn from comment #3) > Any chance of a backport of this and Yes I just had to wait for the tests to finish. > https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/commit/ > f1b6e46c417224887c2f21baa6d4c538a25fe9fb#diff- > ed08df78eba81189642b4e8d670a0adb4b377db6846aecb090b4dce52a9251fa to the v10 That was already done: 517fb88b8a96795cce3f88862148880b1c46b198 Fixed, thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-02-09 14:44 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2021-02-09 10:27 [Bug libstdc++/99021] New: coroutine_handle<_Promise>::from_address() should be noexcept redbeard0531 at gmail dot com 2021-02-09 10:42 ` [Bug libstdc++/99021] " redbeard0531 at gmail dot com 2021-02-09 12:32 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-02-09 13:42 ` redbeard0531 at gmail dot com 2021-02-09 14:26 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org 2021-02-09 14:44 ` redi 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).