* C++ PATCH to implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer (take 2)
@ 2018-05-22 1:08 Marek Polacek
2018-05-22 3:14 ` Jason Merrill
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Marek Polacek @ 2018-05-22 1:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Merrill, GCC Patches
The previous version of this patch got confused by
for (int i = 0; n > 0 ? true : false; i++)
// ...
because even though we see a ; followed by a :, it's not a range-based for with
an initializer. I find it very strange that this didn't show up during the
regtest.
To fix this, I had to uglify range_based_for_with_init_p to also check for a ?.
Yuck.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2018-05-21 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
Implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer.
* parser.c (cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p): New.
(cp_parser_init_statement): Use it. Parse the optional init-statement
for a range-based for loop.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C: New test.
diff --git gcc/cp/parser.c gcc/cp/parser.c
index 3f621911f12..2693cf37a3e 100644
--- gcc/cp/parser.c
+++ gcc/cp/parser.c
@@ -11255,6 +11255,52 @@ cp_parser_statement_seq_opt (cp_parser* parser, tree in_statement_expr)
}
}
+/* Return true if this is the C++20 version of range-based-for with
+ init-statement. */
+
+static bool
+cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p (cp_parser *parser)
+{
+ bool r = false;
+ bool saw_query;
+
+ /* Save tokens so that we can put them back. */
+ cp_lexer_save_tokens (parser->lexer);
+
+ /* There has to be an unnested ; followed by an unnested :. */
+ if (cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (parser,
+ /*recovering=*/false,
+ CPP_SEMICOLON,
+ /*consume_paren=*/false) != -1)
+ goto out;
+
+ /* We found the semicolon, eat it now. */
+ cp_lexer_consume_token (parser->lexer);
+
+ /* Don't get confused by an unnested "?:" operator. This requires a nested
+ stashing of tokens. */
+ cp_lexer_save_tokens (parser->lexer);
+ saw_query
+ = cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (parser, /*recovering=*/false,
+ CPP_QUERY,
+ /*consume_paren=*/false) == -1;
+ cp_lexer_rollback_tokens (parser->lexer);
+ if (saw_query)
+ goto out;
+
+ /* Now look for ':' that is not nested in () or {}. */
+ r = (cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (parser,
+ /*recovering=*/false,
+ CPP_COLON,
+ /*consume_paren=*/false) == -1);
+
+out:
+ /* Roll back the tokens we skipped. */
+ cp_lexer_rollback_tokens (parser->lexer);
+
+ return r;
+}
+
/* Return true if we're looking at (init; cond), false otherwise. */
static bool
@@ -12299,7 +12345,7 @@ cp_parser_iteration_statement (cp_parser* parser, bool *if_p, bool ivdep,
simple-declaration */
static bool
-cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
+cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser *parser, tree *decl)
{
/* If the next token is a `;', then we have an empty
expression-statement. Grammatically, this is also a
@@ -12312,6 +12358,29 @@ cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
bool is_range_for = false;
bool saved_colon_corrects_to_scope_p = parser->colon_corrects_to_scope_p;
+ /* Try to parse the init-statement. */
+ if (cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p (parser))
+ {
+ tree dummy;
+ cp_parser_parse_tentatively (parser);
+ /* Parse the declaration. */
+ cp_parser_simple_declaration (parser,
+ /*function_definition_allowed_p=*/false,
+ &dummy);
+ cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_SEMICOLON, RT_SEMICOLON);
+ if (!cp_parser_parse_definitely (parser))
+ /* That didn't work, try to parse it as an expression-statement. */
+ cp_parser_expression_statement (parser, NULL_TREE);
+
+ if (cxx_dialect < cxx2a)
+ {
+ pedwarn (cp_lexer_peek_token (parser->lexer)->location, 0,
+ "range-based %<for%> loops with initializer only "
+ "available with -std=c++2a or -std=gnu++2a");
+ *decl = error_mark_node;
+ }
+ }
+
/* A colon is used in range-based for. */
parser->colon_corrects_to_scope_p = false;
@@ -12325,7 +12394,7 @@ cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
parser->colon_corrects_to_scope_p = saved_colon_corrects_to_scope_p;
if (cp_lexer_next_token_is (parser->lexer, CPP_COLON))
{
- /* It is a range-for, consume the ':' */
+ /* It is a range-for, consume the ':'. */
cp_lexer_consume_token (parser->lexer);
is_range_for = true;
if (cxx_dialect < cxx11)
@@ -12337,9 +12406,9 @@ cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
}
}
else
- /* The ';' is not consumed yet because we told
- cp_parser_simple_declaration not to. */
- cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_SEMICOLON, RT_SEMICOLON);
+ /* The ';' is not consumed yet because we told
+ cp_parser_simple_declaration not to. */
+ cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_SEMICOLON, RT_SEMICOLON);
if (cp_parser_parse_definitely (parser))
return is_range_for;
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C
index e69de29bb2d..3a5523585a1 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+// { dg-options "" }
+
+void
+fn1 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a) // { dg-warning "range-based .for. loops with initializer only available with" "" { target c++17_down } }
+ ++i;
+
+ int i;
+ for (i = 0; auto x : a) // { dg-warning "range-based .for. loops with initializer only available with" "" { target c++17_down } }
+ ++i;
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C
index e69de29bb2d..acb16c57d1c 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+void
+fn1 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
+ ++i;
+
+ int i;
+ for (i = 0; auto x : a)
+ ++i;
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C
index e69de29bb2d..291e605b92f 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+static const int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+extern void foo (int);
+extern void bar (int, int);
+
+constexpr int
+baz ()
+{
+ return 6;
+}
+
+void
+fn1 (int i)
+{
+ for ((i += 2); auto x : a)
+ foo (i);
+
+ for (auto j = 0, k = 0; auto x : a)
+ bar (j + k, x);
+
+ for (constexpr int j = baz (); auto x : a)
+ bar (x, j);
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C
index e69de29bb2d..6ba783f46cb 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do run }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 1; auto x : a)
+ if (i++ != x)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ int i;
+ for (i = 1; auto x : a)
+ if (i++ != x)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ i = 0;
+ for (i++; auto x : a)
+ if (i != 1)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ for (int s[] = { 1, 1, 1 }; auto x : s)
+ if (x != 1)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C
index e69de29bb2d..62f1c2f04e1 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C
@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+void
+fn1 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
+ ++i;
+
+ i = 0; // { dg-error "not declared" }
+
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
+ {
+ for (int j = 0; auto x : a)
+ {
+ for (int k = 0; auto x : a)
+ k++;
+ k++; // { dg-error "not declared" }
+ }
+ j++; // { dg-error "not declared" }
+ }
+}
+
+void
+fn2 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
+ int i = 3; // { dg-error "redeclaration" }
+}
+void
+fn3 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (;:) // { dg-error "expected" }
+ {
+ }
+
+ for (;;:) // { dg-error "expected" }
+ {
+ }
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C
index e69de29bb2d..4cee60a839e 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do run }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = []{ return 3; }(); auto x : a)
+ if (i != 3)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ for (int i = ({ 3; }); auto x : a)
+ if (i != 3)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C
index e69de29bb2d..3c23a77b15e 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+extern void bar (int);
+
+void
+fn0 (int n)
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 0; n > 0 ? true : false; i++)
+ bar (i);
+
+ for (int i = n ? 3 : 4; auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (auto x = n ? 1 : 2 : a) // { dg-error "initializer" }
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = 1; auto x = n ? 1 : 2 : a) // { dg-error "expected" }
+ bar (x);
+}
Marek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH to implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer (take 2)
2018-05-22 1:08 C++ PATCH to implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer (take 2) Marek Polacek
@ 2018-05-22 3:14 ` Jason Merrill
2018-05-23 1:40 ` Marek Polacek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jason Merrill @ 2018-05-22 3:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marek Polacek; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> wrote:
> The previous version of this patch got confused by
>
> for (int i = 0; n > 0 ? true : false; i++)
> // ...
>
> because even though we see a ; followed by a :, it's not a range-based for with
> an initializer. I find it very strange that this didn't show up during the
> regtest.
>
> To fix this, I had to uglify range_based_for_with_init_p to also check for a ?.
> Yuck.
Perhaps cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 should handle balanced
?: like ()/[]/{}.
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH to implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer (take 2)
2018-05-22 3:14 ` Jason Merrill
@ 2018-05-23 1:40 ` Marek Polacek
2018-05-23 2:01 ` Jason Merrill
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Marek Polacek @ 2018-05-23 1:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Merrill; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 09:51:44PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> wrote:
> > The previous version of this patch got confused by
> >
> > for (int i = 0; n > 0 ? true : false; i++)
> > // ...
> >
> > because even though we see a ; followed by a :, it's not a range-based for with
> > an initializer. I find it very strange that this didn't show up during the
> > regtest.
> >
> > To fix this, I had to uglify range_based_for_with_init_p to also check for a ?.
> > Yuck.
>
> Perhaps cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 should handle balanced
> ?: like ()/[]/{}.
Good point. Clearly there's a difference between ?: and e.g. () because : can
stand alone--e.g. in asm (: "whatever"), labels, goacc arrays like a[0:N], and
so on. The following seems to work well, and is certainly less ugly than the
previous version.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2018-05-22 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
Implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer.
* parser.c (cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p): New.
(cp_parser_init_statement): Use it. Parse the optional init-statement
for a range-based for loop.
(cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1): Handle balancing ?:.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C: New test.
diff --git gcc/cp/parser.c gcc/cp/parser.c
index 6f51f03f47c..8e4c66d8503 100644
--- gcc/cp/parser.c
+++ gcc/cp/parser.c
@@ -3493,6 +3493,7 @@ cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (cp_parser *parser,
unsigned paren_depth = 0;
unsigned brace_depth = 0;
unsigned square_depth = 0;
+ unsigned condop_depth = 0;
if (recovering && or_ttype == CPP_EOF
&& cp_parser_uncommitted_to_tentative_parse_p (parser))
@@ -3504,7 +3505,7 @@ cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (cp_parser *parser,
/* Have we found what we're looking for before the closing paren? */
if (token->type == or_ttype && or_ttype != CPP_EOF
- && !brace_depth && !paren_depth && !square_depth)
+ && !brace_depth && !paren_depth && !square_depth && !condop_depth)
return -1;
switch (token->type)
@@ -3551,6 +3552,16 @@ cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (cp_parser *parser,
}
break;
+ case CPP_QUERY:
+ if (!brace_depth)
+ ++condop_depth;
+ break;
+
+ case CPP_COLON:
+ if (!brace_depth && condop_depth > 0)
+ condop_depth--;
+ break;
+
default:
break;
}
@@ -11255,6 +11266,40 @@ cp_parser_statement_seq_opt (cp_parser* parser, tree in_statement_expr)
}
}
+/* Return true if this is the C++20 version of range-based-for with
+ init-statement. */
+
+static bool
+cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p (cp_parser *parser)
+{
+ bool r = false;
+
+ /* Save tokens so that we can put them back. */
+ cp_lexer_save_tokens (parser->lexer);
+
+ /* There has to be an unnested ; followed by an unnested :. */
+ if (cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (parser,
+ /*recovering=*/false,
+ CPP_SEMICOLON,
+ /*consume_paren=*/false) != -1)
+ goto out;
+
+ /* We found the semicolon, eat it now. */
+ cp_lexer_consume_token (parser->lexer);
+
+ /* Now look for ':' that is not nested in () or {}. */
+ r = (cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (parser,
+ /*recovering=*/false,
+ CPP_COLON,
+ /*consume_paren=*/false) == -1);
+
+out:
+ /* Roll back the tokens we skipped. */
+ cp_lexer_rollback_tokens (parser->lexer);
+
+ return r;
+}
+
/* Return true if we're looking at (init; cond), false otherwise. */
static bool
@@ -12299,7 +12344,7 @@ cp_parser_iteration_statement (cp_parser* parser, bool *if_p, bool ivdep,
simple-declaration */
static bool
-cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
+cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser *parser, tree *decl)
{
/* If the next token is a `;', then we have an empty
expression-statement. Grammatically, this is also a
@@ -12312,6 +12357,29 @@ cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
bool is_range_for = false;
bool saved_colon_corrects_to_scope_p = parser->colon_corrects_to_scope_p;
+ /* Try to parse the init-statement. */
+ if (cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p (parser))
+ {
+ tree dummy;
+ cp_parser_parse_tentatively (parser);
+ /* Parse the declaration. */
+ cp_parser_simple_declaration (parser,
+ /*function_definition_allowed_p=*/false,
+ &dummy);
+ cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_SEMICOLON, RT_SEMICOLON);
+ if (!cp_parser_parse_definitely (parser))
+ /* That didn't work, try to parse it as an expression-statement. */
+ cp_parser_expression_statement (parser, NULL_TREE);
+
+ if (cxx_dialect < cxx2a)
+ {
+ pedwarn (cp_lexer_peek_token (parser->lexer)->location, 0,
+ "range-based %<for%> loops with initializer only "
+ "available with -std=c++2a or -std=gnu++2a");
+ *decl = error_mark_node;
+ }
+ }
+
/* A colon is used in range-based for. */
parser->colon_corrects_to_scope_p = false;
@@ -12325,7 +12393,7 @@ cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
parser->colon_corrects_to_scope_p = saved_colon_corrects_to_scope_p;
if (cp_lexer_next_token_is (parser->lexer, CPP_COLON))
{
- /* It is a range-for, consume the ':' */
+ /* It is a range-for, consume the ':'. */
cp_lexer_consume_token (parser->lexer);
is_range_for = true;
if (cxx_dialect < cxx11)
@@ -12337,9 +12405,9 @@ cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
}
}
else
- /* The ';' is not consumed yet because we told
- cp_parser_simple_declaration not to. */
- cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_SEMICOLON, RT_SEMICOLON);
+ /* The ';' is not consumed yet because we told
+ cp_parser_simple_declaration not to. */
+ cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_SEMICOLON, RT_SEMICOLON);
if (cp_parser_parse_definitely (parser))
return is_range_for;
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C
index e69de29bb2d..3a5523585a1 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+// { dg-options "" }
+
+void
+fn1 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a) // { dg-warning "range-based .for. loops with initializer only available with" "" { target c++17_down } }
+ ++i;
+
+ int i;
+ for (i = 0; auto x : a) // { dg-warning "range-based .for. loops with initializer only available with" "" { target c++17_down } }
+ ++i;
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C
index e69de29bb2d..acb16c57d1c 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+void
+fn1 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
+ ++i;
+
+ int i;
+ for (i = 0; auto x : a)
+ ++i;
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C
index e69de29bb2d..291e605b92f 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+static const int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+extern void foo (int);
+extern void bar (int, int);
+
+constexpr int
+baz ()
+{
+ return 6;
+}
+
+void
+fn1 (int i)
+{
+ for ((i += 2); auto x : a)
+ foo (i);
+
+ for (auto j = 0, k = 0; auto x : a)
+ bar (j + k, x);
+
+ for (constexpr int j = baz (); auto x : a)
+ bar (x, j);
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C
index e69de29bb2d..6ba783f46cb 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do run }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 1; auto x : a)
+ if (i++ != x)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ int i;
+ for (i = 1; auto x : a)
+ if (i++ != x)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ i = 0;
+ for (i++; auto x : a)
+ if (i != 1)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ for (int s[] = { 1, 1, 1 }; auto x : s)
+ if (x != 1)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C
index e69de29bb2d..62f1c2f04e1 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C
@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+void
+fn1 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
+ ++i;
+
+ i = 0; // { dg-error "not declared" }
+
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
+ {
+ for (int j = 0; auto x : a)
+ {
+ for (int k = 0; auto x : a)
+ k++;
+ k++; // { dg-error "not declared" }
+ }
+ j++; // { dg-error "not declared" }
+ }
+}
+
+void
+fn2 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
+ int i = 3; // { dg-error "redeclaration" }
+}
+void
+fn3 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (;:) // { dg-error "expected" }
+ {
+ }
+
+ for (;;:) // { dg-error "expected" }
+ {
+ }
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C
index e69de29bb2d..4cee60a839e 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do run }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = []{ return 3; }(); auto x : a)
+ if (i != 3)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ for (int i = ({ 3; }); auto x : a)
+ if (i != 3)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C
index e69de29bb2d..5a3a89c1c25 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+extern void bar (int);
+
+void
+fn0 (int n)
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ /* Don't get confused by the colon here. */
+ for (int i = 0; n > 0 ? true : false; i++)
+ bar (i);
+
+ for (int i = n ? 3 : 4; auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = n ? ({ a: 3; }) : 4; i < 10; i++)
+ bar (i);
+
+ for (int i = n ? ({ L: 3; }) : 4; auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = n; auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = n ? n ? n : 3 : 3; auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = n ? n ? 3 : n ? 3 : 3 : 3; auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = [=]{ return n ? 1 : 2; }(); auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = [=]{ L2: if (!n) goto L2; else return 2; }(); auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (auto x = n ? 1 : 2 : a) // { dg-error "initializer" }
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = 1; auto x = n ? 1 : 2 : a) // { dg-error "initializer" }
+ bar (x);
+}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH to implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer (take 2)
2018-05-23 1:40 ` Marek Polacek
@ 2018-05-23 2:01 ` Jason Merrill
2018-05-23 14:57 ` Marek Polacek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jason Merrill @ 2018-05-23 2:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marek Polacek; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 7:25 PM, Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 09:51:44PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > The previous version of this patch got confused by
>> >
>> > for (int i = 0; n > 0 ? true : false; i++)
>> > // ...
>> >
>> > because even though we see a ; followed by a :, it's not a range-based for with
>> > an initializer. I find it very strange that this didn't show up during the
>> > regtest.
>> >
>> > To fix this, I had to uglify range_based_for_with_init_p to also check for a ?.
>> > Yuck.
>>
>> Perhaps cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 should handle balanced
>> ?: like ()/[]/{}.
>
> Good point. Clearly there's a difference between ?: and e.g. () because : can
> stand alone--e.g. in asm (: "whatever"), labels, goacc arrays like a[0:N], and
> so on. The following seems to work well, and is certainly less ugly than the
> previous version.
>
> + case CPP_QUERY:
> + if (!brace_depth)
> + ++condop_depth;
> + break;
> +
> + case CPP_COLON:
> + if (!brace_depth && condop_depth > 0)
> + condop_depth--;
> + break;
Since, as you say, colons can appear in more places, maybe we only
want to adjust condop_depth when all the other depths are 0, not just
brace_depth.
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH to implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer (take 2)
2018-05-23 2:01 ` Jason Merrill
@ 2018-05-23 14:57 ` Marek Polacek
2018-05-23 16:42 ` Jason Merrill
2018-05-23 16:48 ` Jakub Jelinek
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Marek Polacek @ 2018-05-23 14:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Merrill; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:46:10PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 7:25 PM, Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 09:51:44PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> >> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > The previous version of this patch got confused by
> >> >
> >> > for (int i = 0; n > 0 ? true : false; i++)
> >> > // ...
> >> >
> >> > because even though we see a ; followed by a :, it's not a range-based for with
> >> > an initializer. I find it very strange that this didn't show up during the
> >> > regtest.
> >> >
> >> > To fix this, I had to uglify range_based_for_with_init_p to also check for a ?.
> >> > Yuck.
> >>
> >> Perhaps cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 should handle balanced
> >> ?: like ()/[]/{}.
> >
> > Good point. Clearly there's a difference between ?: and e.g. () because : can
> > stand alone--e.g. in asm (: "whatever"), labels, goacc arrays like a[0:N], and
> > so on. The following seems to work well, and is certainly less ugly than the
> > previous version.
> >
> > + case CPP_QUERY:
> > + if (!brace_depth)
> > + ++condop_depth;
> > + break;
> > +
> > + case CPP_COLON:
> > + if (!brace_depth && condop_depth > 0)
> > + condop_depth--;
> > + break;
>
> Since, as you say, colons can appear in more places, maybe we only
> want to adjust condop_depth when all the other depths are 0, not just
> brace_depth.
Yeah, I meant to do it but apparently I didn't :(. Fixed below.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2018-05-23 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
Implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer.
* parser.c (cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p): New.
(cp_parser_init_statement): Use it. Parse the optional init-statement
for a range-based for loop.
(cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1): Handle balancing ?:.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C: New test.
diff --git gcc/cp/parser.c gcc/cp/parser.c
index 6f51f03f47c..d3e73488e84 100644
--- gcc/cp/parser.c
+++ gcc/cp/parser.c
@@ -3493,6 +3493,7 @@ cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (cp_parser *parser,
unsigned paren_depth = 0;
unsigned brace_depth = 0;
unsigned square_depth = 0;
+ unsigned condop_depth = 0;
if (recovering && or_ttype == CPP_EOF
&& cp_parser_uncommitted_to_tentative_parse_p (parser))
@@ -3504,7 +3505,7 @@ cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (cp_parser *parser,
/* Have we found what we're looking for before the closing paren? */
if (token->type == or_ttype && or_ttype != CPP_EOF
- && !brace_depth && !paren_depth && !square_depth)
+ && !brace_depth && !paren_depth && !square_depth && !condop_depth)
return -1;
switch (token->type)
@@ -3551,6 +3552,16 @@ cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (cp_parser *parser,
}
break;
+ case CPP_QUERY:
+ if (!brace_depth && !paren_depth && !square_depth)
+ ++condop_depth;
+ break;
+
+ case CPP_COLON:
+ if (!brace_depth && !paren_depth && !square_depth && condop_depth > 0)
+ condop_depth--;
+ break;
+
default:
break;
}
@@ -11255,6 +11266,40 @@ cp_parser_statement_seq_opt (cp_parser* parser, tree in_statement_expr)
}
}
+/* Return true if this is the C++20 version of range-based-for with
+ init-statement. */
+
+static bool
+cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p (cp_parser *parser)
+{
+ bool r = false;
+
+ /* Save tokens so that we can put them back. */
+ cp_lexer_save_tokens (parser->lexer);
+
+ /* There has to be an unnested ; followed by an unnested :. */
+ if (cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (parser,
+ /*recovering=*/false,
+ CPP_SEMICOLON,
+ /*consume_paren=*/false) != -1)
+ goto out;
+
+ /* We found the semicolon, eat it now. */
+ cp_lexer_consume_token (parser->lexer);
+
+ /* Now look for ':' that is not nested in () or {}. */
+ r = (cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (parser,
+ /*recovering=*/false,
+ CPP_COLON,
+ /*consume_paren=*/false) == -1);
+
+out:
+ /* Roll back the tokens we skipped. */
+ cp_lexer_rollback_tokens (parser->lexer);
+
+ return r;
+}
+
/* Return true if we're looking at (init; cond), false otherwise. */
static bool
@@ -12299,7 +12344,7 @@ cp_parser_iteration_statement (cp_parser* parser, bool *if_p, bool ivdep,
simple-declaration */
static bool
-cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
+cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser *parser, tree *decl)
{
/* If the next token is a `;', then we have an empty
expression-statement. Grammatically, this is also a
@@ -12312,6 +12357,29 @@ cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
bool is_range_for = false;
bool saved_colon_corrects_to_scope_p = parser->colon_corrects_to_scope_p;
+ /* Try to parse the init-statement. */
+ if (cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p (parser))
+ {
+ tree dummy;
+ cp_parser_parse_tentatively (parser);
+ /* Parse the declaration. */
+ cp_parser_simple_declaration (parser,
+ /*function_definition_allowed_p=*/false,
+ &dummy);
+ cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_SEMICOLON, RT_SEMICOLON);
+ if (!cp_parser_parse_definitely (parser))
+ /* That didn't work, try to parse it as an expression-statement. */
+ cp_parser_expression_statement (parser, NULL_TREE);
+
+ if (cxx_dialect < cxx2a)
+ {
+ pedwarn (cp_lexer_peek_token (parser->lexer)->location, 0,
+ "range-based %<for%> loops with initializer only "
+ "available with -std=c++2a or -std=gnu++2a");
+ *decl = error_mark_node;
+ }
+ }
+
/* A colon is used in range-based for. */
parser->colon_corrects_to_scope_p = false;
@@ -12325,7 +12393,7 @@ cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
parser->colon_corrects_to_scope_p = saved_colon_corrects_to_scope_p;
if (cp_lexer_next_token_is (parser->lexer, CPP_COLON))
{
- /* It is a range-for, consume the ':' */
+ /* It is a range-for, consume the ':'. */
cp_lexer_consume_token (parser->lexer);
is_range_for = true;
if (cxx_dialect < cxx11)
@@ -12337,9 +12405,9 @@ cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
}
}
else
- /* The ';' is not consumed yet because we told
- cp_parser_simple_declaration not to. */
- cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_SEMICOLON, RT_SEMICOLON);
+ /* The ';' is not consumed yet because we told
+ cp_parser_simple_declaration not to. */
+ cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_SEMICOLON, RT_SEMICOLON);
if (cp_parser_parse_definitely (parser))
return is_range_for;
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C
index e69de29bb2d..3a5523585a1 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+// { dg-options "" }
+
+void
+fn1 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a) // { dg-warning "range-based .for. loops with initializer only available with" "" { target c++17_down } }
+ ++i;
+
+ int i;
+ for (i = 0; auto x : a) // { dg-warning "range-based .for. loops with initializer only available with" "" { target c++17_down } }
+ ++i;
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C
index e69de29bb2d..acb16c57d1c 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+void
+fn1 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
+ ++i;
+
+ int i;
+ for (i = 0; auto x : a)
+ ++i;
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C
index e69de29bb2d..291e605b92f 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+static const int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+extern void foo (int);
+extern void bar (int, int);
+
+constexpr int
+baz ()
+{
+ return 6;
+}
+
+void
+fn1 (int i)
+{
+ for ((i += 2); auto x : a)
+ foo (i);
+
+ for (auto j = 0, k = 0; auto x : a)
+ bar (j + k, x);
+
+ for (constexpr int j = baz (); auto x : a)
+ bar (x, j);
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C
index e69de29bb2d..6ba783f46cb 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do run }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 1; auto x : a)
+ if (i++ != x)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ int i;
+ for (i = 1; auto x : a)
+ if (i++ != x)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ i = 0;
+ for (i++; auto x : a)
+ if (i != 1)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ for (int s[] = { 1, 1, 1 }; auto x : s)
+ if (x != 1)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C
index e69de29bb2d..62f1c2f04e1 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C
@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+void
+fn1 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
+ ++i;
+
+ i = 0; // { dg-error "not declared" }
+
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
+ {
+ for (int j = 0; auto x : a)
+ {
+ for (int k = 0; auto x : a)
+ k++;
+ k++; // { dg-error "not declared" }
+ }
+ j++; // { dg-error "not declared" }
+ }
+}
+
+void
+fn2 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+ for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
+ int i = 3; // { dg-error "redeclaration" }
+}
+void
+fn3 ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (;:) // { dg-error "expected" }
+ {
+ }
+
+ for (;;:) // { dg-error "expected" }
+ {
+ }
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C
index e69de29bb2d..4cee60a839e 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do run }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ for (int i = []{ return 3; }(); auto x : a)
+ if (i != 3)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ for (int i = ({ 3; }); auto x : a)
+ if (i != 3)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C
index e69de29bb2d..5a3a89c1c25 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+extern void bar (int);
+
+void
+fn0 (int n)
+{
+ int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
+
+ /* Don't get confused by the colon here. */
+ for (int i = 0; n > 0 ? true : false; i++)
+ bar (i);
+
+ for (int i = n ? 3 : 4; auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = n ? ({ a: 3; }) : 4; i < 10; i++)
+ bar (i);
+
+ for (int i = n ? ({ L: 3; }) : 4; auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = n; auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = n ? n ? n : 3 : 3; auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = n ? n ? 3 : n ? 3 : 3 : 3; auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = [=]{ return n ? 1 : 2; }(); auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = [=]{ L2: if (!n) goto L2; else return 2; }(); auto x : a)
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (auto x = n ? 1 : 2 : a) // { dg-error "initializer" }
+ bar (x);
+
+ for (int i = 1; auto x = n ? 1 : 2 : a) // { dg-error "initializer" }
+ bar (x);
+}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH to implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer (take 2)
2018-05-23 14:57 ` Marek Polacek
@ 2018-05-23 16:42 ` Jason Merrill
2018-05-23 16:48 ` Jakub Jelinek
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jason Merrill @ 2018-05-23 16:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marek Polacek; +Cc: GCC Patches
OK.
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 09:46:10PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 7:25 PM, Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 09:51:44PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> >> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >> > The previous version of this patch got confused by
>> >> >
>> >> > for (int i = 0; n > 0 ? true : false; i++)
>> >> > // ...
>> >> >
>> >> > because even though we see a ; followed by a :, it's not a range-based for with
>> >> > an initializer. I find it very strange that this didn't show up during the
>> >> > regtest.
>> >> >
>> >> > To fix this, I had to uglify range_based_for_with_init_p to also check for a ?.
>> >> > Yuck.
>> >>
>> >> Perhaps cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 should handle balanced
>> >> ?: like ()/[]/{}.
>> >
>> > Good point. Clearly there's a difference between ?: and e.g. () because : can
>> > stand alone--e.g. in asm (: "whatever"), labels, goacc arrays like a[0:N], and
>> > so on. The following seems to work well, and is certainly less ugly than the
>> > previous version.
>> >
>> > + case CPP_QUERY:
>> > + if (!brace_depth)
>> > + ++condop_depth;
>> > + break;
>> > +
>> > + case CPP_COLON:
>> > + if (!brace_depth && condop_depth > 0)
>> > + condop_depth--;
>> > + break;
>>
>> Since, as you say, colons can appear in more places, maybe we only
>> want to adjust condop_depth when all the other depths are 0, not just
>> brace_depth.
>
> Yeah, I meant to do it but apparently I didn't :(. Fixed below.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
>
> 2018-05-23 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
>
> Implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer.
> * parser.c (cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p): New.
> (cp_parser_init_statement): Use it. Parse the optional init-statement
> for a range-based for loop.
> (cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1): Handle balancing ?:.
>
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C: New test.
>
> diff --git gcc/cp/parser.c gcc/cp/parser.c
> index 6f51f03f47c..d3e73488e84 100644
> --- gcc/cp/parser.c
> +++ gcc/cp/parser.c
> @@ -3493,6 +3493,7 @@ cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (cp_parser *parser,
> unsigned paren_depth = 0;
> unsigned brace_depth = 0;
> unsigned square_depth = 0;
> + unsigned condop_depth = 0;
>
> if (recovering && or_ttype == CPP_EOF
> && cp_parser_uncommitted_to_tentative_parse_p (parser))
> @@ -3504,7 +3505,7 @@ cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (cp_parser *parser,
>
> /* Have we found what we're looking for before the closing paren? */
> if (token->type == or_ttype && or_ttype != CPP_EOF
> - && !brace_depth && !paren_depth && !square_depth)
> + && !brace_depth && !paren_depth && !square_depth && !condop_depth)
> return -1;
>
> switch (token->type)
> @@ -3551,6 +3552,16 @@ cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (cp_parser *parser,
> }
> break;
>
> + case CPP_QUERY:
> + if (!brace_depth && !paren_depth && !square_depth)
> + ++condop_depth;
> + break;
> +
> + case CPP_COLON:
> + if (!brace_depth && !paren_depth && !square_depth && condop_depth > 0)
> + condop_depth--;
> + break;
> +
> default:
> break;
> }
> @@ -11255,6 +11266,40 @@ cp_parser_statement_seq_opt (cp_parser* parser, tree in_statement_expr)
> }
> }
>
> +/* Return true if this is the C++20 version of range-based-for with
> + init-statement. */
> +
> +static bool
> +cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p (cp_parser *parser)
> +{
> + bool r = false;
> +
> + /* Save tokens so that we can put them back. */
> + cp_lexer_save_tokens (parser->lexer);
> +
> + /* There has to be an unnested ; followed by an unnested :. */
> + if (cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (parser,
> + /*recovering=*/false,
> + CPP_SEMICOLON,
> + /*consume_paren=*/false) != -1)
> + goto out;
> +
> + /* We found the semicolon, eat it now. */
> + cp_lexer_consume_token (parser->lexer);
> +
> + /* Now look for ':' that is not nested in () or {}. */
> + r = (cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1 (parser,
> + /*recovering=*/false,
> + CPP_COLON,
> + /*consume_paren=*/false) == -1);
> +
> +out:
> + /* Roll back the tokens we skipped. */
> + cp_lexer_rollback_tokens (parser->lexer);
> +
> + return r;
> +}
> +
> /* Return true if we're looking at (init; cond), false otherwise. */
>
> static bool
> @@ -12299,7 +12344,7 @@ cp_parser_iteration_statement (cp_parser* parser, bool *if_p, bool ivdep,
> simple-declaration */
>
> static bool
> -cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
> +cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser *parser, tree *decl)
> {
> /* If the next token is a `;', then we have an empty
> expression-statement. Grammatically, this is also a
> @@ -12312,6 +12357,29 @@ cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
> bool is_range_for = false;
> bool saved_colon_corrects_to_scope_p = parser->colon_corrects_to_scope_p;
>
> + /* Try to parse the init-statement. */
> + if (cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p (parser))
> + {
> + tree dummy;
> + cp_parser_parse_tentatively (parser);
> + /* Parse the declaration. */
> + cp_parser_simple_declaration (parser,
> + /*function_definition_allowed_p=*/false,
> + &dummy);
> + cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_SEMICOLON, RT_SEMICOLON);
> + if (!cp_parser_parse_definitely (parser))
> + /* That didn't work, try to parse it as an expression-statement. */
> + cp_parser_expression_statement (parser, NULL_TREE);
> +
> + if (cxx_dialect < cxx2a)
> + {
> + pedwarn (cp_lexer_peek_token (parser->lexer)->location, 0,
> + "range-based %<for%> loops with initializer only "
> + "available with -std=c++2a or -std=gnu++2a");
> + *decl = error_mark_node;
> + }
> + }
> +
> /* A colon is used in range-based for. */
> parser->colon_corrects_to_scope_p = false;
>
> @@ -12325,7 +12393,7 @@ cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
> parser->colon_corrects_to_scope_p = saved_colon_corrects_to_scope_p;
> if (cp_lexer_next_token_is (parser->lexer, CPP_COLON))
> {
> - /* It is a range-for, consume the ':' */
> + /* It is a range-for, consume the ':'. */
> cp_lexer_consume_token (parser->lexer);
> is_range_for = true;
> if (cxx_dialect < cxx11)
> @@ -12337,9 +12405,9 @@ cp_parser_init_statement (cp_parser* parser, tree *decl)
> }
> }
> else
> - /* The ';' is not consumed yet because we told
> - cp_parser_simple_declaration not to. */
> - cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_SEMICOLON, RT_SEMICOLON);
> + /* The ';' is not consumed yet because we told
> + cp_parser_simple_declaration not to. */
> + cp_parser_require (parser, CPP_SEMICOLON, RT_SEMICOLON);
>
> if (cp_parser_parse_definitely (parser))
> return is_range_for;
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C
> index e69de29bb2d..3a5523585a1 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> +// P0614R1
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
> +// { dg-options "" }
> +
> +void
> +fn1 ()
> +{
> + int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
> +
> + for (int i = 0; auto x : a) // { dg-warning "range-based .for. loops with initializer only available with" "" { target c++17_down } }
> + ++i;
> +
> + int i;
> + for (i = 0; auto x : a) // { dg-warning "range-based .for. loops with initializer only available with" "" { target c++17_down } }
> + ++i;
> +}
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C
> index e69de29bb2d..acb16c57d1c 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> +// P0614R1
> +// { dg-do compile }
> +// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
> +
> +void
> +fn1 ()
> +{
> + int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
> +
> + for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
> + ++i;
> +
> + int i;
> + for (i = 0; auto x : a)
> + ++i;
> +}
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C
> index e69de29bb2d..291e605b92f 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
> +// P0614R1
> +// { dg-do compile }
> +// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
> +
> +static const int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
> +extern void foo (int);
> +extern void bar (int, int);
> +
> +constexpr int
> +baz ()
> +{
> + return 6;
> +}
> +
> +void
> +fn1 (int i)
> +{
> + for ((i += 2); auto x : a)
> + foo (i);
> +
> + for (auto j = 0, k = 0; auto x : a)
> + bar (j + k, x);
> +
> + for (constexpr int j = baz (); auto x : a)
> + bar (x, j);
> +}
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C
> index e69de29bb2d..6ba783f46cb 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
> +// P0614R1
> +// { dg-do run }
> +// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
> +
> +int
> +main ()
> +{
> + int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
> +
> + for (int i = 1; auto x : a)
> + if (i++ != x)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> +
> + int i;
> + for (i = 1; auto x : a)
> + if (i++ != x)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> +
> + i = 0;
> + for (i++; auto x : a)
> + if (i != 1)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> +
> + for (int s[] = { 1, 1, 1 }; auto x : s)
> + if (x != 1)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> +}
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C
> index e69de29bb2d..62f1c2f04e1 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
> +// P0614R1
> +// { dg-do compile }
> +// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
> +
> +void
> +fn1 ()
> +{
> + int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
> +
> + for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
> + ++i;
> +
> + i = 0; // { dg-error "not declared" }
> +
> + for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
> + {
> + for (int j = 0; auto x : a)
> + {
> + for (int k = 0; auto x : a)
> + k++;
> + k++; // { dg-error "not declared" }
> + }
> + j++; // { dg-error "not declared" }
> + }
> +}
> +
> +void
> +fn2 ()
> +{
> + int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
> + for (int i = 0; auto x : a)
> + int i = 3; // { dg-error "redeclaration" }
> +}
> +void
> +fn3 ()
> +{
> + int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
> +
> + for (;:) // { dg-error "expected" }
> + {
> + }
> +
> + for (;;:) // { dg-error "expected" }
> + {
> + }
> +}
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C
> index e69de29bb2d..4cee60a839e 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
> +// P0614R1
> +// { dg-do run }
> +// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
> +
> +int
> +main ()
> +{
> + int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
> +
> + for (int i = []{ return 3; }(); auto x : a)
> + if (i != 3)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> +
> + for (int i = ({ 3; }); auto x : a)
> + if (i != 3)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> +}
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C
> index e69de29bb2d..5a3a89c1c25 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
> +// P0614R1
> +// { dg-do compile }
> +// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
> +
> +extern void bar (int);
> +
> +void
> +fn0 (int n)
> +{
> + int a[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
> +
> + /* Don't get confused by the colon here. */
> + for (int i = 0; n > 0 ? true : false; i++)
> + bar (i);
> +
> + for (int i = n ? 3 : 4; auto x : a)
> + bar (x);
> +
> + for (int i = n ? ({ a: 3; }) : 4; i < 10; i++)
> + bar (i);
> +
> + for (int i = n ? ({ L: 3; }) : 4; auto x : a)
> + bar (x);
> +
> + for (int i = n; auto x : a)
> + bar (x);
> +
> + for (int i = n ? n ? n : 3 : 3; auto x : a)
> + bar (x);
> +
> + for (int i = n ? n ? 3 : n ? 3 : 3 : 3; auto x : a)
> + bar (x);
> +
> + for (int i = [=]{ return n ? 1 : 2; }(); auto x : a)
> + bar (x);
> +
> + for (int i = [=]{ L2: if (!n) goto L2; else return 2; }(); auto x : a)
> + bar (x);
> +
> + for (auto x = n ? 1 : 2 : a) // { dg-error "initializer" }
> + bar (x);
> +
> + for (int i = 1; auto x = n ? 1 : 2 : a) // { dg-error "initializer" }
> + bar (x);
> +}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH to implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer (take 2)
2018-05-23 14:57 ` Marek Polacek
2018-05-23 16:42 ` Jason Merrill
@ 2018-05-23 16:48 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-05-23 18:50 ` Marek Polacek
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Jelinek @ 2018-05-23 16:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marek Polacek; +Cc: Jason Merrill, GCC Patches
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:45:43AM -0400, Marek Polacek wrote:
> 2018-05-23 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
>
> Implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer.
> * parser.c (cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p): New.
> (cp_parser_init_statement): Use it. Parse the optional init-statement
> for a range-based for loop.
> (cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1): Handle balancing ?:.
>
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C: New test.
Could you please add some testcases that would test the handling of
structured bindings in these new forms of range for, like:
for (int i = 0; auto [ x, y ] : z)
but perhaps for completeness also in the init-stmt and perhaps both spots
too?
Jakub
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH to implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer (take 2)
2018-05-23 16:48 ` Jakub Jelinek
@ 2018-05-23 18:50 ` Marek Polacek
2018-05-23 19:13 ` Jakub Jelinek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Marek Polacek @ 2018-05-23 18:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Jelinek; +Cc: Jason Merrill, GCC Patches
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 06:45:41PM +0200, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:45:43AM -0400, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > 2018-05-23 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
> >
> > Implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer.
> > * parser.c (cp_parser_range_based_for_with_init_p): New.
> > (cp_parser_init_statement): Use it. Parse the optional init-statement
> > for a range-based for loop.
> > (cp_parser_skip_to_closing_parenthesis_1): Handle balancing ?:.
> >
> > * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for1.C: New test.
> > * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for2.C: New test.
> > * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for3.C: New test.
> > * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for4.C: New test.
> > * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for5.C: New test.
> > * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for6.C: New test.
> > * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for7.C: New test.
>
> Could you please add some testcases that would test the handling of
> structured bindings in these new forms of range for, like:
> for (int i = 0; auto [ x, y ] : z)
> but perhaps for completeness also in the init-stmt and perhaps both spots
> too?
Sure.
Tested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2018-05-23 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for8.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for9.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for10.C: New test.
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for10.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for10.C
index e69de29bb2d..a0d0e6d085e 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for10.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for10.C
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do run }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+struct A { int i; long long j; } a[64];
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+ A b = { 1, 2 };
+ for (auto & [ u, v ] : a)
+ {
+ u = 2;
+ v = 3;
+ }
+
+ for (auto [x, y] = b; auto [ u, v ] : a)
+ if (y + u != x + v)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ for (auto [x, y] = b; auto & [ u, v ] : a)
+ if (y + u != x + v)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for8.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for8.C
index e69de29bb2d..204a63204ca 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for8.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for8.C
@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do run }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+struct A { int i; long long j; } a[64];
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+ for (int i = 0; auto &x : a)
+ {
+ x.i = i;
+ x.j = 2 * i++;
+ }
+ for (auto & [ x, y ] : a)
+ {
+ x += 2;
+ y += 3;
+ }
+ for (int i = 0; const auto [ u, v ] : a)
+ {
+ if (u != i + 2 || v != 2 * i++ + 3)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+ }
+ for (int i = 0; auto [ x, y ] : a)
+ {
+ x += 4;
+ y += 5;
+ if (x != i + 6 || y != 2 * i++ + 8)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+ }
+ for (int i = 0; const auto x : a)
+ {
+ if (x.i != i + 2 || x.j != 2 * i++ + 3)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+ }
+}
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for9.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for9.C
index e69de29bb2d..74d71b67213 100644
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for9.C
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for9.C
@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+// P0614R1
+// { dg-do run }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
+
+struct A { int i, j; };
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+ A a = { .i = 2, .j = 3 };
+ int arr[] = { 1, 1, 1 };
+
+ for (auto & [ x, y ] = a; auto z : arr)
+ if (x + z != 3 || y + z != 4)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ for (int d = 1; auto &z : arr)
+ z += d;
+
+ for (const auto [ x, y ] = a; auto z : arr)
+ if (x + z != 4 || y + z != 5)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+
+ for (int d = 1; auto &z : arr)
+ z += d;
+
+ for (auto [ x, y ] = a; auto z : arr)
+ if (x + z != 5 || y + z != 6)
+ __builtin_abort ();
+}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH to implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer (take 2)
2018-05-23 18:50 ` Marek Polacek
@ 2018-05-23 19:13 ` Jakub Jelinek
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Jelinek @ 2018-05-23 19:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marek Polacek; +Cc: Jason Merrill, GCC Patches
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:49:09PM -0400, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > Could you please add some testcases that would test the handling of
> > structured bindings in these new forms of range for, like:
> > for (int i = 0; auto [ x, y ] : z)
> > but perhaps for completeness also in the init-stmt and perhaps both spots
> > too?
>
> Sure.
>
> Tested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
>
> 2018-05-23 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
>
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for8.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for9.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for10.C: New test.
LGTM, thanks.
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for10.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for10.C
> index e69de29bb2d..a0d0e6d085e 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for10.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for10.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
> +// P0614R1
> +// { dg-do run }
> +// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
> +
> +struct A { int i; long long j; } a[64];
> +
> +int
> +main ()
> +{
> + A b = { 1, 2 };
> + for (auto & [ u, v ] : a)
> + {
> + u = 2;
> + v = 3;
> + }
> +
> + for (auto [x, y] = b; auto [ u, v ] : a)
> + if (y + u != x + v)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> +
> + for (auto [x, y] = b; auto & [ u, v ] : a)
> + if (y + u != x + v)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> +}
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for8.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for8.C
> index e69de29bb2d..204a63204ca 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for8.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for8.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
> +// P0614R1
> +// { dg-do run }
> +// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
> +
> +struct A { int i; long long j; } a[64];
> +
> +int
> +main ()
> +{
> + for (int i = 0; auto &x : a)
> + {
> + x.i = i;
> + x.j = 2 * i++;
> + }
> + for (auto & [ x, y ] : a)
> + {
> + x += 2;
> + y += 3;
> + }
> + for (int i = 0; const auto [ u, v ] : a)
> + {
> + if (u != i + 2 || v != 2 * i++ + 3)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> + }
> + for (int i = 0; auto [ x, y ] : a)
> + {
> + x += 4;
> + y += 5;
> + if (x != i + 6 || y != 2 * i++ + 8)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> + }
> + for (int i = 0; const auto x : a)
> + {
> + if (x.i != i + 2 || x.j != 2 * i++ + 3)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> + }
> +}
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for9.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for9.C
> index e69de29bb2d..74d71b67213 100644
> --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for9.C
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/range-for9.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
> +// P0614R1
> +// { dg-do run }
> +// { dg-options "-std=c++2a" }
> +
> +struct A { int i, j; };
> +
> +int
> +main ()
> +{
> + A a = { .i = 2, .j = 3 };
> + int arr[] = { 1, 1, 1 };
> +
> + for (auto & [ x, y ] = a; auto z : arr)
> + if (x + z != 3 || y + z != 4)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> +
> + for (int d = 1; auto &z : arr)
> + z += d;
> +
> + for (const auto [ x, y ] = a; auto z : arr)
> + if (x + z != 4 || y + z != 5)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> +
> + for (int d = 1; auto &z : arr)
> + z += d;
> +
> + for (auto [ x, y ] = a; auto z : arr)
> + if (x + z != 5 || y + z != 6)
> + __builtin_abort ();
> +}
Jakub
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-05-23 18:59 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-05-22 1:08 C++ PATCH to implement P0614R1, Range-based for statements with initializer (take 2) Marek Polacek
2018-05-22 3:14 ` Jason Merrill
2018-05-23 1:40 ` Marek Polacek
2018-05-23 2:01 ` Jason Merrill
2018-05-23 14:57 ` Marek Polacek
2018-05-23 16:42 ` Jason Merrill
2018-05-23 16:48 ` Jakub Jelinek
2018-05-23 18:50 ` Marek Polacek
2018-05-23 19:13 ` Jakub Jelinek
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).