From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id F09113858024; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 12:29:14 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org F09113858024 From: "antiro42 at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/99790] New: internal compiler error: in expand_expr_real_2 Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 12:29:14 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.2.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: antiro42 at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_file_loc bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter target_milestone Message-ID: 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: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 12:29:15 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D99790 Bug ID: 99790 Summary: internal compiler error: in expand_expr_real_2 Product: gcc Version: 10.2.0 URL: https://godbolt.org/z/PsMrafh9c Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: antiro42 at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- internal compiler error: in expand_expr_real_2, at expr.c:8701 Error is reproducible in compiler explorer with both gcc 10.2 and gcc trunk. See attached URL for a minimal reproduction scenario. The error seems to occur when trying to use the stored pointer to member in= the lambda. I tried adding the suggested compiler flags but this did not influence the result. The code compiles fine in clang 11.=