public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "matthurd at acm dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/99926] New: Parameter packs and variadic arguments: Clang, gcc, and msvc differ on this one Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2021 07:47:41 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-99926-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99926 Bug ID: 99926 Summary: Parameter packs and variadic arguments: Clang, gcc, and msvc differ on this one Product: gcc Version: 11.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: matthurd at acm dot org Target Milestone: --- I found three compiler differences from three compilers: https://godbolt.org/z/cEoYrn4T8 - two are wrong. g++ trunk and 10.2 affected. I thought gcc may be correct and clang may be incorrect in this compiler difference so I filed a bug with llvm. Richard Smith surmised gcc was incorrect and clang is correct, so I have closed the clang bug and I'm opening a gcc bug here if you'll indulge me. [Note: clang issue: https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=49852] ________________ gcc, clang, and msvc all compile this fun one: auto foo(auto......) { return 42; } int add_three() { return foo<int,int>(3,4,5); } ____________________ But they argue about this curious one: [[nodiscard]] constexpr auto foo(auto...t...) noexcept {return (... + t);} int add_three() { return foo<int,int>(3,4,5);} //gcc(7), clang(12), msvc(err) int add_more() { return foo(3,4,5,6); } //gcc(18), clang(18), msvc(err) https://godbolt.org/z/cEoYrn4T8 ____________________ It looks like gcc may be failing to extend the deduction as clang does. Like clang, EDG extends it as well, Richard reported. msvc will give the same answer as clang if auto is not used and it is a normal template expansion. This leaves gcc as the outlier I guess. That gcc may be wrong makes sense, though it makes a C-style variadic after a parameter pack unreachable which is a wee semantic whole in the grammar I guess. --Matt.
next reply other threads:[~2021-04-06 7:47 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-04-06 7:47 matthurd at acm dot org [this message] 2021-04-06 8:13 ` [Bug c++/99926] " matthurd at acm dot org 2021-04-17 3:38 ` matthurd at acm dot 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-99926-4@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).