public inbox for gcc-cvs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Patrick Palka <ppalka@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-cvs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [gcc r12-6424] c++: "more constrained" vs staticness of memfn [PR103783]
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 19:59:00 +0000 (GMT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220110195900.B6702388881B@sourceware.org> (raw)

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:3e95a974c39e922d19bf7ac1246730c516ae01f2

commit r12-6424-g3e95a974c39e922d19bf7ac1246730c516ae01f2
Author: Patrick Palka <ppalka@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon Jan 10 14:57:51 2022 -0500

    c++: "more constrained" vs staticness of memfn [PR103783]
    
    Here we're rejecting the calls to g1 and g2 as ambiguous even though one
    overload is more constrained than the other (and they're otherwise tied),
    because the implicit 'this' parameter of the non-static overload causes
    cand_parms_match to think the function parameter lists aren't equivalent.
    
    This patch fixes this by making cand_parms_match skip over 'this'
    appropriately.  Note that this bug only affects partial ordering of
    non-template member functions because for member function templates
    more_specialized_fn seems to already skip over 'this' appropriately.
    
            PR c++/103783
    
    gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
    
            * call.c (cand_parms_match): Skip over 'this' when given one
            static and one non-static member function.
    
    gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
    
            * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memfun2.C: New test.

Diff:
---
 gcc/cp/call.c                                 | 17 ++++++++++++++---
 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memfun2.C | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gcc/cp/call.c b/gcc/cp/call.c
index 44fc6d0f695..88ab23392d2 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/call.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/call.c
@@ -11945,7 +11945,7 @@ joust_maybe_elide_copy (z_candidate *&cand)
 /* True if the defining declarations of the two candidates have equivalent
    parameters.  */
 
-bool
+static bool
 cand_parms_match (z_candidate *c1, z_candidate *c2)
 {
   tree fn1 = c1->fn;
@@ -11967,8 +11967,19 @@ cand_parms_match (z_candidate *c1, z_candidate *c2)
       fn1 = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (t1);
       fn2 = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (t2);
     }
-  return compparms (TYPE_ARG_TYPES (TREE_TYPE (fn1)),
-		    TYPE_ARG_TYPES (TREE_TYPE (fn2)));
+  tree parms1 = TYPE_ARG_TYPES (TREE_TYPE (fn1));
+  tree parms2 = TYPE_ARG_TYPES (TREE_TYPE (fn2));
+  if (DECL_FUNCTION_MEMBER_P (fn1)
+      && DECL_FUNCTION_MEMBER_P (fn2)
+      && (DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P (fn1)
+	  != DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P (fn2)))
+    {
+      /* Ignore 'this' when comparing the parameters of a static member
+	 function with those of a non-static one.  */
+      parms1 = skip_artificial_parms_for (fn1, parms1);
+      parms2 = skip_artificial_parms_for (fn2, parms2);
+    }
+  return compparms (parms1, parms2);
 }
 
 /* Compare two candidates for overloading as described in
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memfun2.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memfun2.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..e3845e48387
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-memfun2.C
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+// PR c++/103783
+// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
+
+template<bool B>
+struct A {
+  template<class...> void f1() = delete;
+  template<class...> static void f1() requires B;
+
+  template<class...> void f2() requires B;
+  template<class...> static void f2() = delete;
+
+  void g1() = delete;
+  static void g1() requires B;
+
+  void g2() requires B;
+  static void g2() = delete;
+};
+
+int main() {
+  A<true> a;
+  a.f1(); // OK
+  a.f2(); // OK
+  a.g1(); // OK, previously rejected as ambiguous
+  a.g2(); // OK, previously rejected as ambiguous
+}


                 reply	other threads:[~2022-01-10 19:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

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=20220110195900.B6702388881B@sourceware.org \
    --to=ppalka@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-cvs@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: link
Be 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).