From: Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
To: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>, Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Subject: C++ PATCH to fix rejects-valid with constexpr ctor in C++17 (PR c++/83692)
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 21:58:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180125211639.GA2620@redhat.com> (raw)
This is a similar problem to 83116: we'd cached a constexpr call, but after a
store the result had become invalid, yet we used the wrong result again when
encountering the same call later. This resulted in evaluating a THROW_EXPR
which doesn't work. Details in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83692#c5
The fix for 83116 didn't work here, because when evaluating the body of the
ctor via store_init_value -> cxx_constant_value we are in STRICT, so we do
cache.
It seems that we may no longer rely on the constexpr call table when we
do cxx_eval_store_expression, because that just rewrites *valp, i.e. the
value of an object. Might be too big a hammer again, but I couldn't think
of how I could guard the caching of a constexpr call.
This doesn't manifest in C++14 because build_special_member_call in C++17 is
more aggressive with copy elisions (as required by P0135 which changed how we
view prvalues). In C++14 build_special_member_call produces a CALL_EXPR, so
expand_default_init calls maybe_constant_init, for which STRICT is false, so
we avoid caching as per 83116.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2018-01-25 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
PR c++/83692
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_store_expression): Clear constexpr_call_table.
* g++.dg/cpp1y/constexpr-83692.C: New test.
diff --git gcc/cp/constexpr.c gcc/cp/constexpr.c
index 4d2ee4a28fc..0202d22f320 100644
--- gcc/cp/constexpr.c
+++ gcc/cp/constexpr.c
@@ -3663,6 +3663,10 @@ cxx_eval_store_expression (const constexpr_ctx *ctx, tree t,
else
*valp = init;
+ /* We've rewritten a value of a temporary in this constexpr
+ context which might invalide a cached call. */
+ constexpr_call_table = NULL;
+
/* Update TREE_CONSTANT and TREE_SIDE_EFFECTS on enclosing
CONSTRUCTORs, if any. */
tree elt;
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/constexpr-83692.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/constexpr-83692.C
index e69de29bb2d..292ba7c22e9 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/constexpr-83692.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/constexpr-83692.C
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+// PR c++/83692
+// { dg-do compile { target c++14 } }
+
+struct integer {
+ constexpr int value() const { return m_value; }
+ int m_value;
+};
+
+struct outer {
+ integer m_x{0};
+ constexpr outer()
+ {
+ if (m_x.value() != 0)
+ throw 0;
+ m_x.m_value = integer{1}.value();
+ if (m_x.value() != 1)
+ throw 0;
+ }
+};
+
+constexpr outer o{};
Marek
next reply other threads:[~2018-01-25 21:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-25 21:58 Marek Polacek [this message]
2018-01-25 22:37 ` Marek Polacek
2018-02-02 19:11 ` Jason Merrill
2018-02-05 13:38 ` Marek Polacek
2018-02-05 18:45 ` Jason Merrill
2018-02-16 21:10 ` Jason Merrill
2018-02-23 14:30 ` Marek Polacek
2018-02-24 1:55 ` Jason Merrill
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=20180125211639.GA2620@redhat.com \
--to=polacek@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jason@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).