public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "StevenSun2021 at hotmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/99686] ICE when using both concepts and full specialization Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 11:35:13 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-99686-4-7zEXgI8pTC@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-99686-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99686 --- Comment #3 from Steven Sun <StevenSun2021 at hotmail dot com> --- @W E Brown: I got your idea. So are all uses like this ill-formed? This seems unexpected for me. I would expect the complete specialization is full specialization for both primary templates. I also find facts that support your idea: If I modify the full specialization to -------------------- template <> void func<int&&> (int&& arg){} -------------------- It compiles. See https://godbolt.org/z/fh9Mx7Krr If I modify the full specialization to -------------------- template <> void func<int> (int&& arg){} -------------------- It produce the same ICE output as comment 1. See https://godbolt.org/z/eMa5YcrrE It looks like the compiler doesn't knows which primary template to specialize. I look up in the C++20 standard, and did not find anything about 2 primary templates exists. The code in Comment 1 compiles for g++ 6.1 to 9.3, then breaks since 10.1 (all under -std=c++17 -fconcepts). In conclusion, this makes sences but I didn't see that coming. Anyway, I think a possible improvement is make ICE to an error of "ambigous full specialization". Or even better, a change in C++23 standard.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-25 11:35 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-03-20 19:21 [Bug c++/99686] New: ICE when concepts on C++17 when providing both T&& and const T& specialization StevenSun2021 at hotmail dot com 2021-03-20 19:43 ` [Bug c++/99686] " StevenSun2021 at hotmail dot com 2021-03-21 6:51 ` [Bug c++/99686] ICE when using both concepts and full specialization webrown.cpp at gmail dot com 2021-03-25 11:35 ` StevenSun2021 at hotmail dot com [this message] 2021-03-25 12:32 ` webrown.cpp at gmail dot com 2021-05-05 0:09 ` StevenSun2021 at hotmail dot com 2021-05-05 0:33 ` StevenSun2021 at hotmail dot com 2021-05-07 13:15 ` StevenSun2021 at hotmail dot com 2021-05-07 14:35 ` StevenSun2021 at hotmail dot com 2022-12-07 15:55 ` [Bug c++/99686] ICE when using concepts on function template before c++20 (Reason already found) 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-99686-4-7zEXgI8pTC@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).