From: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
To: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] c++, v4: Add support for __real__/__imag__ modifications in constant expressions [PR88174]
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2022 15:41:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <083bf8c7-068f-8f9c-e864-80be71e66cce@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YuEAu32PhzkqXoeg@tucnak>
On 7/27/22 02:09, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 04:44:41PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> But preeval should always be true, so we'd never reach the new handling in
>> the if (!preeval) block. Certainly the new testcase doesn't exercise this
>> code.
>
> Ok, changed now.
>
> I had to keep the ctors[i] = valp; statement in the !preeval block, because
> otherwise e.g. 20_util/optional/monadic/transform.cc test fails randomly.
> It was wrong already before the patch, it would adjust
> TREE_CONSTANT/TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS sometimes on no longer used trees,
> but with the vector holding pointers to trees rather than trees it is even
> more severe.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
OK, thanks.
> 2022-07-27 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
>
> PR c++/88174
> * constexpr.cc (cxx_eval_store_expression): Handle REALPART_EXPR
> and IMAGPART_EXPR. Change ctors from releasing_vec to
> auto_vec<tree *>, adjust all uses. For !preeval, update ctors
> vector.
>
> * g++.dg/cpp1y/constexpr-complex1.C: New test.
>
> --- gcc/cp/constexpr.cc.jj 2022-07-04 12:26:18.147053851 +0200
> +++ gcc/cp/constexpr.cc 2022-07-26 17:35:53.100556949 +0200
> @@ -5726,6 +5726,20 @@ cxx_eval_store_expression (const constex
> }
> break;
>
> + case REALPART_EXPR:
> + gcc_assert (probe == target);
> + vec_safe_push (refs, probe);
> + vec_safe_push (refs, TREE_TYPE (probe));
> + probe = TREE_OPERAND (probe, 0);
> + break;
> +
> + case IMAGPART_EXPR:
> + gcc_assert (probe == target);
> + vec_safe_push (refs, probe);
> + vec_safe_push (refs, TREE_TYPE (probe));
> + probe = TREE_OPERAND (probe, 0);
> + break;
> +
> default:
> if (evaluated)
> object = probe;
> @@ -5764,7 +5778,8 @@ cxx_eval_store_expression (const constex
> type = TREE_TYPE (object);
> bool no_zero_init = true;
>
> - releasing_vec ctors, indexes;
> + auto_vec<tree *> ctors;
> + releasing_vec indexes;
> auto_vec<int> index_pos_hints;
> bool activated_union_member_p = false;
> bool empty_base = false;
> @@ -5804,14 +5819,36 @@ cxx_eval_store_expression (const constex
> *valp = ary_ctor;
> }
>
> - /* If the value of object is already zero-initialized, any new ctors for
> - subobjects will also be zero-initialized. */
> - no_zero_init = CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING (*valp);
> -
> enum tree_code code = TREE_CODE (type);
> tree reftype = refs->pop();
> tree index = refs->pop();
>
> + if (code == COMPLEX_TYPE)
> + {
> + if (TREE_CODE (*valp) == COMPLEX_CST)
> + *valp = build2 (COMPLEX_EXPR, type, TREE_REALPART (*valp),
> + TREE_IMAGPART (*valp));
> + else if (TREE_CODE (*valp) == CONSTRUCTOR
> + && CONSTRUCTOR_NELTS (*valp) == 0
> + && CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING (*valp))
> + {
> + tree r = build_constructor (reftype, NULL);
> + CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING (r) = 1;
> + *valp = build2 (COMPLEX_EXPR, type, r, r);
> + }
> + gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (*valp) == COMPLEX_EXPR);
> + ctors.safe_push (valp);
> + vec_safe_push (indexes, index);
> + valp = &TREE_OPERAND (*valp, TREE_CODE (index) == IMAGPART_EXPR);
> + gcc_checking_assert (refs->is_empty ());
> + type = reftype;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + /* If the value of object is already zero-initialized, any new ctors for
> + subobjects will also be zero-initialized. */
> + no_zero_init = CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING (*valp);
> +
> if (code == RECORD_TYPE && is_empty_field (index))
> /* Don't build a sub-CONSTRUCTOR for an empty base or field, as they
> have no data and might have an offset lower than previously declared
> @@ -5854,7 +5891,7 @@ cxx_eval_store_expression (const constex
> no_zero_init = true;
> }
>
> - vec_safe_push (ctors, *valp);
> + ctors.safe_push (valp);
> vec_safe_push (indexes, index);
>
> constructor_elt *cep
> @@ -5916,11 +5953,11 @@ cxx_eval_store_expression (const constex
> semantics are not applied on an object under construction.
> They come into effect when the constructor for the most
> derived object ends." */
> - for (tree elt : *ctors)
> + for (tree *elt : ctors)
> if (same_type_ignoring_top_level_qualifiers_p
> - (TREE_TYPE (const_object_being_modified), TREE_TYPE (elt)))
> + (TREE_TYPE (const_object_being_modified), TREE_TYPE (*elt)))
> {
> - fail = TREE_READONLY (elt);
> + fail = TREE_READONLY (*elt);
> break;
> }
> }
> @@ -5961,6 +5998,7 @@ cxx_eval_store_expression (const constex
> valp = ctx->global->values.get (object);
> for (unsigned i = 0; i < vec_safe_length (indexes); i++)
> {
> + ctors[i] = valp;
> constructor_elt *cep
> = get_or_insert_ctor_field (*valp, indexes[i], index_pos_hints[i]);
> valp = &cep->value;
> @@ -6023,17 +6061,45 @@ cxx_eval_store_expression (const constex
> CONSTRUCTORs, if any. */
> bool c = TREE_CONSTANT (init);
> bool s = TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS (init);
> + if (!indexes->is_empty ())
> + {
> + tree last = indexes->last ();
> + if (TREE_CODE (last) == REALPART_EXPR
> + || TREE_CODE (last) == IMAGPART_EXPR)
> + {
> + /* And canonicalize COMPLEX_EXPR into COMPLEX_CST if
> + possible. */
> + tree *cexpr = ctors.last ();
> + if (tree c = const_binop (COMPLEX_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (*cexpr),
> + TREE_OPERAND (*cexpr, 0),
> + TREE_OPERAND (*cexpr, 1)))
> + *cexpr = c;
> + else
> + {
> + TREE_CONSTANT (*cexpr)
> + = (TREE_CONSTANT (TREE_OPERAND (*cexpr, 0))
> + & TREE_CONSTANT (TREE_OPERAND (*cexpr, 1)));
> + TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS (*cexpr)
> + = (TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS (TREE_OPERAND (*cexpr, 0))
> + | TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS (TREE_OPERAND (*cexpr, 1)));
> + }
> + c = TREE_CONSTANT (*cexpr);
> + s = TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS (*cexpr);
> + }
> + }
> if (!c || s || activated_union_member_p)
> - for (tree elt : *ctors)
> + for (tree *elt : ctors)
> {
> + if (TREE_CODE (*elt) != CONSTRUCTOR)
> + continue;
> if (!c)
> - TREE_CONSTANT (elt) = false;
> + TREE_CONSTANT (*elt) = false;
> if (s)
> - TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS (elt) = true;
> + TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS (*elt) = true;
> /* Clear CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING since we've activated a member of
> this union. */
> - if (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (elt)) == UNION_TYPE)
> - CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING (elt) = false;
> + if (TREE_CODE (TREE_TYPE (*elt)) == UNION_TYPE)
> + CONSTRUCTOR_NO_CLEARING (*elt) = false;
> }
>
> if (lval)
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/constexpr-complex1.C.jj 2022-07-04 17:30:47.884580998 +0200
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/constexpr-complex1.C 2022-07-04 17:30:47.884580998 +0200
> @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
> +// PR c++/88174
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++14 } }
> +
> +constexpr bool
> +foo (double x, double y, double z, double w)
> +{
> + __complex__ double a = 0;
> + __real__ a = x;
> + __imag__ a = y;
> +#if __cpp_constexpr >= 201907L
> + __complex__ double b;
> + __real__ b = z;
> +#else
> + __complex__ double b = z;
> +#endif
> + __imag__ b = w;
> + a += b;
> + a -= b;
> + a *= b;
> + a /= b;
> + return __real__ a == x && __imag__ a == y;
> +}
> +
> +static_assert (foo (1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0), "");
>
>
> Jakub
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-06 22:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-09 8:37 [PATCH] c++: " Jakub Jelinek
2022-06-10 17:27 ` Jason Merrill
2022-06-10 19:57 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-06-17 17:06 ` [PATCH] c++, v2: " Jakub Jelinek
2022-06-20 20:03 ` Jason Merrill
2022-06-27 16:31 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-07-04 15:50 ` [PATCH] c++, v3: " Jakub Jelinek
2022-07-05 20:44 ` Jason Merrill
2022-07-05 20:57 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-07-27 9:09 ` [PATCH] c++, v4: " Jakub Jelinek
2022-08-06 22:41 ` Jason Merrill [this message]
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=083bf8c7-068f-8f9c-e864-80be71e66cce@redhat.com \
--to=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
/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).