public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "xmh970252187 at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/99192] New: A wrong Aggregate initialization for a union with a variant member of non-aggregate class type Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 09:25:07 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-99192-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99192 Bug ID: 99192 Summary: A wrong Aggregate initialization for a union with a variant member of non-aggregate class type Product: gcc Version: 10.2.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: xmh970252187 at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- struct X { const int a; int b; X(int):a(0){}}; union Y { X x;int k; }; int main(){ Y y{ }; } Such an example is accepted by GCC(https://godbolt.org/z/hTn8zc) but rejected by Clang. GCC has a wrong interpretation for this example. Union `Y` is an aggregate class type as per [dcl.init.aggr#1], So aggregate initialization is applied to this declaration `Y y{ };`. According to > If the aggregate is a union and the initializer list is empty, then >> if any variant member has a default member initializer, that member is initialized from its default member initializer; >> otherwise, the first member of the union (if any) is copy-initialized from an empty initializer list. Since there's no default-initializer for a member of Y, hence the second bullet applies here. That means, the first member will be copy-initialized from an empty initializer list. However, the class `X` is not an aggregate class type and it has a user-defined constructor `X(int)`, Hence the following rule will be applied to initialize `x`, that is: >Otherwise, if T is a class type, constructors are considered. The applicable constructors are enumerated and the best one is chosen through overload resolution ([over.match], [over.match.list]). If a narrowing conversion (see below) is required to convert any of the arguments, the program is ill-formed. The only candidate function here is `X(int)` and the corresponding argument list is empty. So, there's no viable function that exists, Hence the invocation should be ill-formed here as per: > If a best viable function exists and is unique, overload resolution succeeds and produces it as the result. Otherwise overload resolution fails and the invocation is ill-formed.
next reply other threads:[~2021-02-22 9:25 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-02-22 9:25 xmh970252187 at gmail dot com [this message] 2021-03-03 20:46 ` [Bug c++/99192] " mpolacek 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-99192-4@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: linkBe 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).