* C++ PATCH for c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept
@ 2019-03-07 22:42 Marek Polacek
2019-03-14 13:08 ` Marek Polacek
2019-03-14 20:24 ` Jason Merrill
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Marek Polacek @ 2019-03-07 22:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: GCC Patches, Jason Merrill
This was one of those PRs where the more you poke, the more ICEs turn up.
This patch fixes the ones I could find. The original problem was that
maybe_instantiate_noexcept got a TEMPLATE_DECL created for the member
friend template in do_friend. Its noexcept-specification was deferred,
so we went to the block with push_access_scope, but that crashes on a
TEMPLATE_DECL. One approach could be to somehow not defer noexcept-specs
for friend templates, I guess, but I didn't want to do that.
So the approach I did take in the end was to handle TEMPLATE_DECLs in
maybe_instantiate_noexcept.
That broke in register_parameter_specializations but we don't need this
code anyway, so let's do away with it -- the current_class_{ref,ptr}
code is enough to fix the PR that register_parameter_specializations was
introduced for.
Another issue was that since here we are instantiating a deferred noexcept,
in a instantiate_class_template context, processing_template_decl was 0.
Let's pretend it's on for the tsubst purposes here, and for build_noexcept_spec
too, so that the *_dependent_expression_p functions work.
Lastly, I found an invalid testcase that was breaking because a template code
leaked to constexpr functions. This I fixed similarly to the recent explicit
PR fix (r269131).
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2019-03-07 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
PR c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept.
* except.c (build_noexcept_spec): Call instantiate_non_dependent_expr
before perform_implicit_conversion_flags. Add processing_template_decl
sentinel.
* pt.c (maybe_instantiate_noexcept): For function templates, use their
template result (function decl). Don't set up local specializations.
Temporarily turn on processing_template_decl. Update the template type
too.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept36.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp1y/noexcept1.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C: New test.
diff --git gcc/cp/except.c gcc/cp/except.c
index 139e871d7a7..d97b8d40542 100644
--- gcc/cp/except.c
+++ gcc/cp/except.c
@@ -1285,10 +1285,13 @@ build_noexcept_spec (tree expr, tsubst_flags_t complain)
if (TREE_CODE (expr) != DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT
&& !value_dependent_expression_p (expr))
{
+ expr = instantiate_non_dependent_expr_sfinae (expr, complain);
+ /* Don't let perform_implicit_conversion_flags create more template
+ codes. */
+ processing_template_decl_sentinel s;
expr = perform_implicit_conversion_flags (boolean_type_node, expr,
complain,
LOOKUP_NORMAL);
- expr = instantiate_non_dependent_expr (expr);
expr = cxx_constant_value (expr);
}
if (TREE_CODE (expr) == INTEGER_CST)
diff --git gcc/cp/pt.c gcc/cp/pt.c
index 906cfe0a58c..44a2c4606f8 100644
--- gcc/cp/pt.c
+++ gcc/cp/pt.c
@@ -24174,6 +24174,17 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain)
if (DECL_CLONED_FUNCTION_P (fn))
fn = DECL_CLONED_FUNCTION (fn);
+
+ tree orig_fn = NULL_TREE;
+ /* For a member friend template we can get a TEMPLATE_DECL. Let's use
+ its FUNCTION_DECL for the rest of this function -- push_access_scope
+ doesn't accept TEMPLATE_DECLs. */
+ if (DECL_FUNCTION_TEMPLATE_P (fn))
+ {
+ orig_fn = fn;
+ fn = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (fn);
+ }
+
fntype = TREE_TYPE (fn);
spec = TYPE_RAISES_EXCEPTIONS (fntype);
@@ -24204,37 +24215,41 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain)
push_deferring_access_checks (dk_no_deferred);
input_location = DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (fn);
- /* A new stack interferes with pop_access_scope. */
- {
- /* Set up the list of local specializations. */
- local_specialization_stack lss (lss_copy);
-
- tree save_ccp = current_class_ptr;
- tree save_ccr = current_class_ref;
- /* If needed, set current_class_ptr for the benefit of
- tsubst_copy/PARM_DECL. */
- tree tdecl = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (fn));
- if (DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P (tdecl))
- {
- tree this_parm = DECL_ARGUMENTS (tdecl);
- current_class_ptr = NULL_TREE;
- current_class_ref = cp_build_fold_indirect_ref (this_parm);
- current_class_ptr = this_parm;
- }
+ tree save_ccp = current_class_ptr;
+ tree save_ccr = current_class_ref;
+ /* If needed, set current_class_ptr for the benefit of
+ tsubst_copy/PARM_DECL. */
+ tree tdecl = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (fn));
+ if (DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P (tdecl))
+ {
+ tree this_parm = DECL_ARGUMENTS (tdecl);
+ current_class_ptr = NULL_TREE;
+ current_class_ref = cp_build_fold_indirect_ref (this_parm);
+ current_class_ptr = this_parm;
+ }
- /* Create substitution entries for the parameters. */
- register_parameter_specializations (tdecl, fn);
+ /* If this function is represented by a TEMPLATE_DECL, then
+ the deferred noexcept-specification might still contain
+ dependent types, even after substitution. And we need the
+ dependency check functions to work in build_noexcept_spec. */
+ if (orig_fn)
+ ++processing_template_decl;
- /* Do deferred instantiation of the noexcept-specifier. */
- noex = tsubst_copy_and_build (DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_PATTERN (noex),
- DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_ARGS (noex),
- tf_warning_or_error, fn,
- /*function_p=*/false,
- /*i_c_e_p=*/true);
- current_class_ptr = save_ccp;
- current_class_ref = save_ccr;
- spec = build_noexcept_spec (noex, tf_warning_or_error);
- }
+ /* Do deferred instantiation of the noexcept-specifier. */
+ noex = tsubst_copy_and_build (DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_PATTERN (noex),
+ DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_ARGS (noex),
+ tf_warning_or_error, fn,
+ /*function_p=*/false,
+ /*i_c_e_p=*/true);
+
+ current_class_ptr = save_ccp;
+ current_class_ref = save_ccr;
+
+ /* Build up the noexcept-specification. */
+ spec = build_noexcept_spec (noex, tf_warning_or_error);
+
+ if (orig_fn)
+ --processing_template_decl;
pop_deferring_access_checks ();
pop_access_scope (fn);
@@ -24250,6 +24265,8 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain)
return false;
TREE_TYPE (fn) = build_exception_variant (fntype, spec);
+ if (orig_fn)
+ TREE_TYPE (orig_fn) = TREE_TYPE (fn);
}
FOR_EACH_CLONE (clone, fn)
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept36.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept36.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..ecab59df694
--- /dev/null
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept36.C
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+// PR c++/89612
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+
+template <typename>
+struct C {
+ template <int N>
+ friend int foo() noexcept(N);
+
+ template <int N>
+ friend int foo2() noexcept(N); // { dg-error "different exception" }
+};
+
+template <int N>
+int foo() noexcept(N);
+
+template <int N>
+int foo2() noexcept(N + 1);
+
+C<int> c;
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/noexcept1.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/noexcept1.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..2344b1ba92c
--- /dev/null
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/noexcept1.C
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+// PR c++/89612
+// { dg-do compile { target c++14 } }
+
+template <int> bool b;
+
+template <typename>
+struct C {
+ template <typename> friend int foo() noexcept(b<1>); // { dg-error "not usable in a constant expression|different exception specifier" }
+};
+
+template <typename> int foo() noexcept(b<1>);
+
+auto a = C<int>();
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..d0a61d95e87
--- /dev/null
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// PR c++/89612
+// { dg-do compile { target c++17 } }
+
+template <typename a> using b = typename a ::c;
+template <typename> bool d;
+template <typename, typename> struct e {
+ template <typename f, typename g> e(f, g) {}
+ template <typename h, typename i, typename j>
+ friend auto k(h &&, const j &, i &&) noexcept(d<b<h>, h> &&d<b<i>, i>);
+};
+template <typename l, typename m> e(l, m)->e<l, m>;
+template <typename l, typename m, typename j>
+auto k(l &&, const j &, m &&) noexcept(d<b<l>, l> &&d<b<m>, m>);
+int main() {
+ e(0, [] {});
+}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH for c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept
2019-03-07 22:42 C++ PATCH for c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept Marek Polacek
@ 2019-03-14 13:08 ` Marek Polacek
2019-03-14 20:24 ` Jason Merrill
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Marek Polacek @ 2019-03-14 13:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: GCC Patches, Jason Merrill
Ping.
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 04:52:55PM -0500, Marek Polacek wrote:
> This was one of those PRs where the more you poke, the more ICEs turn up.
> This patch fixes the ones I could find. The original problem was that
> maybe_instantiate_noexcept got a TEMPLATE_DECL created for the member
> friend template in do_friend. Its noexcept-specification was deferred,
> so we went to the block with push_access_scope, but that crashes on a
> TEMPLATE_DECL. One approach could be to somehow not defer noexcept-specs
> for friend templates, I guess, but I didn't want to do that.
>
> So the approach I did take in the end was to handle TEMPLATE_DECLs in
> maybe_instantiate_noexcept.
>
> That broke in register_parameter_specializations but we don't need this
> code anyway, so let's do away with it -- the current_class_{ref,ptr}
> code is enough to fix the PR that register_parameter_specializations was
> introduced for.
>
> Another issue was that since here we are instantiating a deferred noexcept,
> in a instantiate_class_template context, processing_template_decl was 0.
> Let's pretend it's on for the tsubst purposes here, and for build_noexcept_spec
> too, so that the *_dependent_expression_p functions work.
>
> Lastly, I found an invalid testcase that was breaking because a template code
> leaked to constexpr functions. This I fixed similarly to the recent explicit
> PR fix (r269131).
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
>
> 2019-03-07 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
>
> PR c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept.
> * except.c (build_noexcept_spec): Call instantiate_non_dependent_expr
> before perform_implicit_conversion_flags. Add processing_template_decl
> sentinel.
> * pt.c (maybe_instantiate_noexcept): For function templates, use their
> template result (function decl). Don't set up local specializations.
> Temporarily turn on processing_template_decl. Update the template type
> too.
>
> * g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept36.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp1y/noexcept1.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C: New test.
>
> diff --git gcc/cp/except.c gcc/cp/except.c
> index 139e871d7a7..d97b8d40542 100644
> --- gcc/cp/except.c
> +++ gcc/cp/except.c
> @@ -1285,10 +1285,13 @@ build_noexcept_spec (tree expr, tsubst_flags_t complain)
> if (TREE_CODE (expr) != DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT
> && !value_dependent_expression_p (expr))
> {
> + expr = instantiate_non_dependent_expr_sfinae (expr, complain);
> + /* Don't let perform_implicit_conversion_flags create more template
> + codes. */
> + processing_template_decl_sentinel s;
> expr = perform_implicit_conversion_flags (boolean_type_node, expr,
> complain,
> LOOKUP_NORMAL);
> - expr = instantiate_non_dependent_expr (expr);
> expr = cxx_constant_value (expr);
> }
> if (TREE_CODE (expr) == INTEGER_CST)
> diff --git gcc/cp/pt.c gcc/cp/pt.c
> index 906cfe0a58c..44a2c4606f8 100644
> --- gcc/cp/pt.c
> +++ gcc/cp/pt.c
> @@ -24174,6 +24174,17 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain)
>
> if (DECL_CLONED_FUNCTION_P (fn))
> fn = DECL_CLONED_FUNCTION (fn);
> +
> + tree orig_fn = NULL_TREE;
> + /* For a member friend template we can get a TEMPLATE_DECL. Let's use
> + its FUNCTION_DECL for the rest of this function -- push_access_scope
> + doesn't accept TEMPLATE_DECLs. */
> + if (DECL_FUNCTION_TEMPLATE_P (fn))
> + {
> + orig_fn = fn;
> + fn = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (fn);
> + }
> +
> fntype = TREE_TYPE (fn);
> spec = TYPE_RAISES_EXCEPTIONS (fntype);
>
> @@ -24204,37 +24215,41 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain)
> push_deferring_access_checks (dk_no_deferred);
> input_location = DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (fn);
>
> - /* A new stack interferes with pop_access_scope. */
> - {
> - /* Set up the list of local specializations. */
> - local_specialization_stack lss (lss_copy);
> -
> - tree save_ccp = current_class_ptr;
> - tree save_ccr = current_class_ref;
> - /* If needed, set current_class_ptr for the benefit of
> - tsubst_copy/PARM_DECL. */
> - tree tdecl = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (fn));
> - if (DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P (tdecl))
> - {
> - tree this_parm = DECL_ARGUMENTS (tdecl);
> - current_class_ptr = NULL_TREE;
> - current_class_ref = cp_build_fold_indirect_ref (this_parm);
> - current_class_ptr = this_parm;
> - }
> + tree save_ccp = current_class_ptr;
> + tree save_ccr = current_class_ref;
> + /* If needed, set current_class_ptr for the benefit of
> + tsubst_copy/PARM_DECL. */
> + tree tdecl = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (fn));
> + if (DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P (tdecl))
> + {
> + tree this_parm = DECL_ARGUMENTS (tdecl);
> + current_class_ptr = NULL_TREE;
> + current_class_ref = cp_build_fold_indirect_ref (this_parm);
> + current_class_ptr = this_parm;
> + }
>
> - /* Create substitution entries for the parameters. */
> - register_parameter_specializations (tdecl, fn);
> + /* If this function is represented by a TEMPLATE_DECL, then
> + the deferred noexcept-specification might still contain
> + dependent types, even after substitution. And we need the
> + dependency check functions to work in build_noexcept_spec. */
> + if (orig_fn)
> + ++processing_template_decl;
>
> - /* Do deferred instantiation of the noexcept-specifier. */
> - noex = tsubst_copy_and_build (DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_PATTERN (noex),
> - DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_ARGS (noex),
> - tf_warning_or_error, fn,
> - /*function_p=*/false,
> - /*i_c_e_p=*/true);
> - current_class_ptr = save_ccp;
> - current_class_ref = save_ccr;
> - spec = build_noexcept_spec (noex, tf_warning_or_error);
> - }
> + /* Do deferred instantiation of the noexcept-specifier. */
> + noex = tsubst_copy_and_build (DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_PATTERN (noex),
> + DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_ARGS (noex),
> + tf_warning_or_error, fn,
> + /*function_p=*/false,
> + /*i_c_e_p=*/true);
> +
> + current_class_ptr = save_ccp;
> + current_class_ref = save_ccr;
> +
> + /* Build up the noexcept-specification. */
> + spec = build_noexcept_spec (noex, tf_warning_or_error);
> +
> + if (orig_fn)
> + --processing_template_decl;
>
> pop_deferring_access_checks ();
> pop_access_scope (fn);
> @@ -24250,6 +24265,8 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain)
> return false;
>
> TREE_TYPE (fn) = build_exception_variant (fntype, spec);
> + if (orig_fn)
> + TREE_TYPE (orig_fn) = TREE_TYPE (fn);
> }
>
> FOR_EACH_CLONE (clone, fn)
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept36.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept36.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..ecab59df694
> --- /dev/null
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept36.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
> +// PR c++/89612
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
> +
> +template <typename>
> +struct C {
> + template <int N>
> + friend int foo() noexcept(N);
> +
> + template <int N>
> + friend int foo2() noexcept(N); // { dg-error "different exception" }
> +};
> +
> +template <int N>
> +int foo() noexcept(N);
> +
> +template <int N>
> +int foo2() noexcept(N + 1);
> +
> +C<int> c;
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/noexcept1.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/noexcept1.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..2344b1ba92c
> --- /dev/null
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/noexcept1.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
> +// PR c++/89612
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++14 } }
> +
> +template <int> bool b;
> +
> +template <typename>
> +struct C {
> + template <typename> friend int foo() noexcept(b<1>); // { dg-error "not usable in a constant expression|different exception specifier" }
> +};
> +
> +template <typename> int foo() noexcept(b<1>);
> +
> +auto a = C<int>();
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..d0a61d95e87
> --- /dev/null
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> +// PR c++/89612
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++17 } }
> +
> +template <typename a> using b = typename a ::c;
> +template <typename> bool d;
> +template <typename, typename> struct e {
> + template <typename f, typename g> e(f, g) {}
> + template <typename h, typename i, typename j>
> + friend auto k(h &&, const j &, i &&) noexcept(d<b<h>, h> &&d<b<i>, i>);
> +};
> +template <typename l, typename m> e(l, m)->e<l, m>;
> +template <typename l, typename m, typename j>
> +auto k(l &&, const j &, m &&) noexcept(d<b<l>, l> &&d<b<m>, m>);
> +int main() {
> + e(0, [] {});
> +}
Marek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH for c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept
2019-03-07 22:42 C++ PATCH for c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept Marek Polacek
2019-03-14 13:08 ` Marek Polacek
@ 2019-03-14 20:24 ` Jason Merrill
2019-03-19 16:02 ` Marek Polacek
1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Jason Merrill @ 2019-03-14 20:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marek Polacek, GCC Patches
On 3/7/19 4:52 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> This was one of those PRs where the more you poke, the more ICEs turn up.
> This patch fixes the ones I could find. The original problem was that
> maybe_instantiate_noexcept got a TEMPLATE_DECL created for the member
> friend template in do_friend. Its noexcept-specification was deferred,
> so we went to the block with push_access_scope, but that crashes on a
> TEMPLATE_DECL. One approach could be to somehow not defer noexcept-specs
> for friend templates, I guess, but I didn't want to do that.
How does it make sense to instantiate the noexcept-specifier of a
template? We should only get there for fully-instantiated function decls.
> Lastly, I found an invalid testcase that was breaking because a template code
> leaked to constexpr functions. This I fixed similarly to the recent explicit
> PR fix (r269131).
This spot should probably also use build_converted_constant_expr.
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH for c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept
2019-03-14 20:24 ` Jason Merrill
@ 2019-03-19 16:02 ` Marek Polacek
2019-03-21 20:05 ` Jason Merrill
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Marek Polacek @ 2019-03-19 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Merrill; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 04:22:41PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/7/19 4:52 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > This was one of those PRs where the more you poke, the more ICEs turn up.
> > This patch fixes the ones I could find. The original problem was that
> > maybe_instantiate_noexcept got a TEMPLATE_DECL created for the member
> > friend template in do_friend. Its noexcept-specification was deferred,
> > so we went to the block with push_access_scope, but that crashes on a
> > TEMPLATE_DECL. One approach could be to somehow not defer noexcept-specs
> > for friend templates, I guess, but I didn't want to do that.
>
> How does it make sense to instantiate the noexcept-specifier of a template?
> We should only get there for fully-instantiated function decls.
Hmm, but duplicate_decls calls check_redeclaration_exception_specification even
for DECL_FUNCTION_TEMPLATE_Ps.
It's likely I got this wrong, but I thought template friends are somewhat
special, and they are wrapped in a TEMPLATE_DECL even when it's not an
instantiation. If I have this
template <typename>
class C {
int n;
template <int N>
friend int foo(C);
};
template <int N>
int foo(C<int> c)
{
return c.n;
}
void
g ()
{
C<int> c;
foo<0>(c);
}
then we call instantiate_class_template for C, which calls tsubst_friend_function
on the TEMPLATE_DECL foo, but that remains a TEMPLATE_DECL, unlike for member
template functions. Here's a related patch:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2014-01/msg01918.html
Note the crash happens in tsubst_friend_function. I wouldn't know when to
check the noexcept-specifier of such a TEMPLATE_DECL for a template friend
if not there.
> > Lastly, I found an invalid testcase that was breaking because a template code
> > leaked to constexpr functions. This I fixed similarly to the recent explicit
> > PR fix (r269131).
>
> This spot should probably also use build_converted_constant_expr.
Ok, I'll address this.
Marek
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH for c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept
2019-03-19 16:02 ` Marek Polacek
@ 2019-03-21 20:05 ` Jason Merrill
2019-03-28 19:23 ` Marek Polacek
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Jason Merrill @ 2019-03-21 20:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marek Polacek; +Cc: GCC Patches
On 3/19/19 11:45 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 04:22:41PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On 3/7/19 4:52 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
>>> This was one of those PRs where the more you poke, the more ICEs turn up.
>>> This patch fixes the ones I could find. The original problem was that
>>> maybe_instantiate_noexcept got a TEMPLATE_DECL created for the member
>>> friend template in do_friend. Its noexcept-specification was deferred,
>>> so we went to the block with push_access_scope, but that crashes on a
>>> TEMPLATE_DECL. One approach could be to somehow not defer noexcept-specs
>>> for friend templates, I guess, but I didn't want to do that.
>> How does it make sense to instantiate the noexcept-specifier of a template?
>> We should only get there for fully-instantiated function decls.
>
> Hmm, but duplicate_decls calls check_redeclaration_exception_specification even
> for DECL_FUNCTION_TEMPLATE_Ps.
> ...
> Note the crash happens in tsubst_friend_function. I wouldn't know when to
> check the noexcept-specifier of such a TEMPLATE_DECL for a template friend
> if not there.
Hmm, true, I guess we do need to do a partial instantiation of the
noexcept-specifier in order to compare it.
> That broke in register_parameter_specializations but we don't need this
> code anyway, so let's do away with it -- the current_class_{ref,ptr}
> code is enough to fix the PR that register_parameter_specializations was
> introduced for.
What about uses of non-'this' parameters in the noexcept-specification?
template <typename T>
struct C {
template <int N>
friend void foo(T t) noexcept(sizeof(decltype(t)) > 1);
};
template <int N>
void foo(int i) noexcept { }
C<int> c;
>>> Lastly, I found an invalid testcase that was breaking because a template code
>>> leaked to constexpr functions. This I fixed similarly to the recent explicit
>>> PR fix (r269131).
>>
>> This spot should probably also use build_converted_constant_expr.
>
> Ok, I'll address this.
I'm finding this repeated pattern awkward. Earlier you changed
check_narrowing to use maybe_constant_value instead of
fold_non_dependent_expr, but perhaps whatever that fixed should have
been fixed instead with a processing_template_decl_sentinel in the
enclosing code that already instantiated the expression. That ought to
avoid any need to change this spot or r269131.
Jason
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH for c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept
2019-03-21 20:05 ` Jason Merrill
@ 2019-03-28 19:23 ` Marek Polacek
2019-03-28 20:08 ` Jason Merrill
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Marek Polacek @ 2019-03-28 19:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jason Merrill; +Cc: GCC Patches
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 04:00:41PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 3/19/19 11:45 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 04:22:41PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > On 3/7/19 4:52 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > > > This was one of those PRs where the more you poke, the more ICEs turn up.
> > > > This patch fixes the ones I could find. The original problem was that
> > > > maybe_instantiate_noexcept got a TEMPLATE_DECL created for the member
> > > > friend template in do_friend. Its noexcept-specification was deferred,
> > > > so we went to the block with push_access_scope, but that crashes on a
> > > > TEMPLATE_DECL. One approach could be to somehow not defer noexcept-specs
> > > > for friend templates, I guess, but I didn't want to do that.
>
> > > How does it make sense to instantiate the noexcept-specifier of a template?
> > > We should only get there for fully-instantiated function decls.
> >
> > Hmm, but duplicate_decls calls check_redeclaration_exception_specification even
> > for DECL_FUNCTION_TEMPLATE_Ps.
> > ...
> > Note the crash happens in tsubst_friend_function. I wouldn't know when to
> > check the noexcept-specifier of such a TEMPLATE_DECL for a template friend
> > if not there.
>
> Hmm, true, I guess we do need to do a partial instantiation of the
> noexcept-specifier in order to compare it.
*nod*
> > That broke in register_parameter_specializations but we don't need this
> > code anyway, so let's do away with it -- the current_class_{ref,ptr}
> > code is enough to fix the PR that register_parameter_specializations was
> > introduced for.
>
> What about uses of non-'this' parameters in the noexcept-specification?
>
> template <typename T>
> struct C {
> template <int N>
> friend void foo(T t) noexcept(sizeof(decltype(t)) > 1);
> };
>
> template <int N>
> void foo(int i) noexcept { }
>
> C<int> c;
Still works. I extended the test to see if we detect the scenario when the
noexcept-specifiers don't match, and we do. It's noexcept39.C.
> > > > Lastly, I found an invalid testcase that was breaking because a template code
> > > > leaked to constexpr functions. This I fixed similarly to the recent explicit
> > > > PR fix (r269131).
> > >
> > > This spot should probably also use build_converted_constant_expr.
> >
> > Ok, I'll address this.
>
> I'm finding this repeated pattern awkward. Earlier you changed
> check_narrowing to use maybe_constant_value instead of
> fold_non_dependent_expr, but perhaps whatever that fixed should have been
> fixed instead with a processing_template_decl_sentinel in the enclosing code
> that already instantiated the expression. That ought to avoid any need to
> change this spot or r269131.
So this also came up in the other patch. Why don't I drop this part (and the
noexcept1.C test) and open a new PR for this issue, so that we don't conflate
two problems? The following patch fixes the original issue.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
2019-03-28 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
PR c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept.
* pt.c (maybe_instantiate_noexcept): For function templates, use their
template result (function decl). Don't set up local specializations.
Temporarily turn on processing_template_decl. Update the template type
too.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept38.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept39.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C: New test.
diff --git gcc/cp/pt.c gcc/cp/pt.c
index 05d5371d8a6..fa30a7f00c8 100644
--- gcc/cp/pt.c
+++ gcc/cp/pt.c
@@ -24192,6 +24192,17 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain)
if (DECL_CLONED_FUNCTION_P (fn))
fn = DECL_CLONED_FUNCTION (fn);
+
+ tree orig_fn = NULL_TREE;
+ /* For a member friend template we can get a TEMPLATE_DECL. Let's use
+ its FUNCTION_DECL for the rest of this function -- push_access_scope
+ doesn't accept TEMPLATE_DECLs. */
+ if (DECL_FUNCTION_TEMPLATE_P (fn))
+ {
+ orig_fn = fn;
+ fn = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (fn);
+ }
+
fntype = TREE_TYPE (fn);
spec = TYPE_RAISES_EXCEPTIONS (fntype);
@@ -24228,37 +24239,41 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain)
push_deferring_access_checks (dk_no_deferred);
input_location = DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (fn);
- /* A new stack interferes with pop_access_scope. */
- {
- /* Set up the list of local specializations. */
- local_specialization_stack lss (lss_copy);
-
- tree save_ccp = current_class_ptr;
- tree save_ccr = current_class_ref;
- /* If needed, set current_class_ptr for the benefit of
- tsubst_copy/PARM_DECL. */
- tree tdecl = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (fn));
- if (DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P (tdecl))
- {
- tree this_parm = DECL_ARGUMENTS (tdecl);
- current_class_ptr = NULL_TREE;
- current_class_ref = cp_build_fold_indirect_ref (this_parm);
- current_class_ptr = this_parm;
- }
+ tree save_ccp = current_class_ptr;
+ tree save_ccr = current_class_ref;
+ /* If needed, set current_class_ptr for the benefit of
+ tsubst_copy/PARM_DECL. */
+ tree tdecl = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (fn));
+ if (DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P (tdecl))
+ {
+ tree this_parm = DECL_ARGUMENTS (tdecl);
+ current_class_ptr = NULL_TREE;
+ current_class_ref = cp_build_fold_indirect_ref (this_parm);
+ current_class_ptr = this_parm;
+ }
- /* Create substitution entries for the parameters. */
- register_parameter_specializations (tdecl, fn);
+ /* If this function is represented by a TEMPLATE_DECL, then
+ the deferred noexcept-specification might still contain
+ dependent types, even after substitution. And we need the
+ dependency check functions to work in build_noexcept_spec. */
+ if (orig_fn)
+ ++processing_template_decl;
- /* Do deferred instantiation of the noexcept-specifier. */
- noex = tsubst_copy_and_build (DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_PATTERN (noex),
- DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_ARGS (noex),
- tf_warning_or_error, fn,
- /*function_p=*/false,
- /*i_c_e_p=*/true);
- current_class_ptr = save_ccp;
- current_class_ref = save_ccr;
- spec = build_noexcept_spec (noex, tf_warning_or_error);
- }
+ /* Do deferred instantiation of the noexcept-specifier. */
+ noex = tsubst_copy_and_build (DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_PATTERN (noex),
+ DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_ARGS (noex),
+ tf_warning_or_error, fn,
+ /*function_p=*/false,
+ /*i_c_e_p=*/true);
+
+ current_class_ptr = save_ccp;
+ current_class_ref = save_ccr;
+
+ /* Build up the noexcept-specification. */
+ spec = build_noexcept_spec (noex, tf_warning_or_error);
+
+ if (orig_fn)
+ --processing_template_decl;
pop_deferring_access_checks ();
pop_access_scope (fn);
@@ -24278,6 +24293,8 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain)
}
TREE_TYPE (fn) = build_exception_variant (fntype, spec);
+ if (orig_fn)
+ TREE_TYPE (orig_fn) = TREE_TYPE (fn);
}
FOR_EACH_CLONE (clone, fn)
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept38.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept38.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..ecab59df694
--- /dev/null
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept38.C
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+// PR c++/89612
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+
+template <typename>
+struct C {
+ template <int N>
+ friend int foo() noexcept(N);
+
+ template <int N>
+ friend int foo2() noexcept(N); // { dg-error "different exception" }
+};
+
+template <int N>
+int foo() noexcept(N);
+
+template <int N>
+int foo2() noexcept(N + 1);
+
+C<int> c;
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept39.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept39.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..fbebbed5e4c
--- /dev/null
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept39.C
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+// PR c++/89612
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+
+template <typename T>
+struct C {
+ template <int N>
+ friend void foo(T t) noexcept(sizeof(decltype(t)) > 1);
+
+ template <int N>
+ friend void foo2(T t) noexcept(sizeof(decltype(t)) < 1); // { dg-error "different exception" }
+};
+
+template <int N>
+void foo(int i) noexcept { }
+
+template <int N>
+void foo2(int i) noexcept { }
+
+C<int> c;
diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..d0a61d95e87
--- /dev/null
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// PR c++/89612
+// { dg-do compile { target c++17 } }
+
+template <typename a> using b = typename a ::c;
+template <typename> bool d;
+template <typename, typename> struct e {
+ template <typename f, typename g> e(f, g) {}
+ template <typename h, typename i, typename j>
+ friend auto k(h &&, const j &, i &&) noexcept(d<b<h>, h> &&d<b<i>, i>);
+};
+template <typename l, typename m> e(l, m)->e<l, m>;
+template <typename l, typename m, typename j>
+auto k(l &&, const j &, m &&) noexcept(d<b<l>, l> &&d<b<m>, m>);
+int main() {
+ e(0, [] {});
+}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: C++ PATCH for c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept
2019-03-28 19:23 ` Marek Polacek
@ 2019-03-28 20:08 ` Jason Merrill
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Jason Merrill @ 2019-03-28 20:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marek Polacek; +Cc: GCC Patches
On 3/28/19 2:59 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 04:00:41PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>> On 3/19/19 11:45 AM, Marek Polacek wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 04:22:41PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
>>>> On 3/7/19 4:52 PM, Marek Polacek wrote:
>>>>> This was one of those PRs where the more you poke, the more ICEs turn up.
>>>>> This patch fixes the ones I could find. The original problem was that
>>>>> maybe_instantiate_noexcept got a TEMPLATE_DECL created for the member
>>>>> friend template in do_friend. Its noexcept-specification was deferred,
>>>>> so we went to the block with push_access_scope, but that crashes on a
>>>>> TEMPLATE_DECL. One approach could be to somehow not defer noexcept-specs
>>>>> for friend templates, I guess, but I didn't want to do that.
>>
>>>> How does it make sense to instantiate the noexcept-specifier of a template?
>>>> We should only get there for fully-instantiated function decls.
>>>
>>> Hmm, but duplicate_decls calls check_redeclaration_exception_specification even
>>> for DECL_FUNCTION_TEMPLATE_Ps.
>>> ...
>>> Note the crash happens in tsubst_friend_function. I wouldn't know when to
>>> check the noexcept-specifier of such a TEMPLATE_DECL for a template friend
>>> if not there.
>>
>> Hmm, true, I guess we do need to do a partial instantiation of the
>> noexcept-specifier in order to compare it.
>
> *nod*
>
>>> That broke in register_parameter_specializations but we don't need this
>>> code anyway, so let's do away with it -- the current_class_{ref,ptr}
>>> code is enough to fix the PR that register_parameter_specializations was
>>> introduced for.
>>
>> What about uses of non-'this' parameters in the noexcept-specification?
>>
>> template <typename T>
>> struct C {
>> template <int N>
>> friend void foo(T t) noexcept(sizeof(decltype(t)) > 1);
>> };
>>
>> template <int N>
>> void foo(int i) noexcept { }
>>
>> C<int> c;
>
> Still works. I extended the test to see if we detect the scenario when the
> noexcept-specifiers don't match, and we do. It's noexcept39.C.
>
>>>>> Lastly, I found an invalid testcase that was breaking because a template code
>>>>> leaked to constexpr functions. This I fixed similarly to the recent explicit
>>>>> PR fix (r269131).
>>>>
>>>> This spot should probably also use build_converted_constant_expr.
>>>
>>> Ok, I'll address this.
>>
>> I'm finding this repeated pattern awkward. Earlier you changed
>> check_narrowing to use maybe_constant_value instead of
>> fold_non_dependent_expr, but perhaps whatever that fixed should have been
>> fixed instead with a processing_template_decl_sentinel in the enclosing code
>> that already instantiated the expression. That ought to avoid any need to
>> change this spot or r269131.
>
> So this also came up in the other patch. Why don't I drop this part (and the
> noexcept1.C test) and open a new PR for this issue, so that we don't conflate
> two problems? The following patch fixes the original issue.
>
> Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux, ok for trunk?
OK.
Jason
>
> 2019-03-28 Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
>
> PR c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept.
> * pt.c (maybe_instantiate_noexcept): For function templates, use their
> template result (function decl). Don't set up local specializations.
> Temporarily turn on processing_template_decl. Update the template type
> too.
>
> * g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept38.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept39.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C: New test.
>
> diff --git gcc/cp/pt.c gcc/cp/pt.c
> index 05d5371d8a6..fa30a7f00c8 100644
> --- gcc/cp/pt.c
> +++ gcc/cp/pt.c
> @@ -24192,6 +24192,17 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain)
>
> if (DECL_CLONED_FUNCTION_P (fn))
> fn = DECL_CLONED_FUNCTION (fn);
> +
> + tree orig_fn = NULL_TREE;
> + /* For a member friend template we can get a TEMPLATE_DECL. Let's use
> + its FUNCTION_DECL for the rest of this function -- push_access_scope
> + doesn't accept TEMPLATE_DECLs. */
> + if (DECL_FUNCTION_TEMPLATE_P (fn))
> + {
> + orig_fn = fn;
> + fn = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (fn);
> + }
> +
> fntype = TREE_TYPE (fn);
> spec = TYPE_RAISES_EXCEPTIONS (fntype);
>
> @@ -24228,37 +24239,41 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain)
> push_deferring_access_checks (dk_no_deferred);
> input_location = DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (fn);
>
> - /* A new stack interferes with pop_access_scope. */
> - {
> - /* Set up the list of local specializations. */
> - local_specialization_stack lss (lss_copy);
> -
> - tree save_ccp = current_class_ptr;
> - tree save_ccr = current_class_ref;
> - /* If needed, set current_class_ptr for the benefit of
> - tsubst_copy/PARM_DECL. */
> - tree tdecl = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (fn));
> - if (DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P (tdecl))
> - {
> - tree this_parm = DECL_ARGUMENTS (tdecl);
> - current_class_ptr = NULL_TREE;
> - current_class_ref = cp_build_fold_indirect_ref (this_parm);
> - current_class_ptr = this_parm;
> - }
> + tree save_ccp = current_class_ptr;
> + tree save_ccr = current_class_ref;
> + /* If needed, set current_class_ptr for the benefit of
> + tsubst_copy/PARM_DECL. */
> + tree tdecl = DECL_TEMPLATE_RESULT (DECL_TI_TEMPLATE (fn));
> + if (DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P (tdecl))
> + {
> + tree this_parm = DECL_ARGUMENTS (tdecl);
> + current_class_ptr = NULL_TREE;
> + current_class_ref = cp_build_fold_indirect_ref (this_parm);
> + current_class_ptr = this_parm;
> + }
>
> - /* Create substitution entries for the parameters. */
> - register_parameter_specializations (tdecl, fn);
> + /* If this function is represented by a TEMPLATE_DECL, then
> + the deferred noexcept-specification might still contain
> + dependent types, even after substitution. And we need the
> + dependency check functions to work in build_noexcept_spec. */
> + if (orig_fn)
> + ++processing_template_decl;
>
> - /* Do deferred instantiation of the noexcept-specifier. */
> - noex = tsubst_copy_and_build (DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_PATTERN (noex),
> - DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_ARGS (noex),
> - tf_warning_or_error, fn,
> - /*function_p=*/false,
> - /*i_c_e_p=*/true);
> - current_class_ptr = save_ccp;
> - current_class_ref = save_ccr;
> - spec = build_noexcept_spec (noex, tf_warning_or_error);
> - }
> + /* Do deferred instantiation of the noexcept-specifier. */
> + noex = tsubst_copy_and_build (DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_PATTERN (noex),
> + DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT_ARGS (noex),
> + tf_warning_or_error, fn,
> + /*function_p=*/false,
> + /*i_c_e_p=*/true);
> +
> + current_class_ptr = save_ccp;
> + current_class_ref = save_ccr;
> +
> + /* Build up the noexcept-specification. */
> + spec = build_noexcept_spec (noex, tf_warning_or_error);
> +
> + if (orig_fn)
> + --processing_template_decl;
>
> pop_deferring_access_checks ();
> pop_access_scope (fn);
> @@ -24278,6 +24293,8 @@ maybe_instantiate_noexcept (tree fn, tsubst_flags_t complain)
> }
>
> TREE_TYPE (fn) = build_exception_variant (fntype, spec);
> + if (orig_fn)
> + TREE_TYPE (orig_fn) = TREE_TYPE (fn);
> }
>
> FOR_EACH_CLONE (clone, fn)
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept38.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept38.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..ecab59df694
> --- /dev/null
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept38.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
> +// PR c++/89612
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
> +
> +template <typename>
> +struct C {
> + template <int N>
> + friend int foo() noexcept(N);
> +
> + template <int N>
> + friend int foo2() noexcept(N); // { dg-error "different exception" }
> +};
> +
> +template <int N>
> +int foo() noexcept(N);
> +
> +template <int N>
> +int foo2() noexcept(N + 1);
> +
> +C<int> c;
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept39.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept39.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..fbebbed5e4c
> --- /dev/null
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept39.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
> +// PR c++/89612
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
> +
> +template <typename T>
> +struct C {
> + template <int N>
> + friend void foo(T t) noexcept(sizeof(decltype(t)) > 1);
> +
> + template <int N>
> + friend void foo2(T t) noexcept(sizeof(decltype(t)) < 1); // { dg-error "different exception" }
> +};
> +
> +template <int N>
> +void foo(int i) noexcept { }
> +
> +template <int N>
> +void foo2(int i) noexcept { }
> +
> +C<int> c;
> diff --git gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..d0a61d95e87
> --- /dev/null
> +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1z/noexcept-type21.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> +// PR c++/89612
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++17 } }
> +
> +template <typename a> using b = typename a ::c;
> +template <typename> bool d;
> +template <typename, typename> struct e {
> + template <typename f, typename g> e(f, g) {}
> + template <typename h, typename i, typename j>
> + friend auto k(h &&, const j &, i &&) noexcept(d<b<h>, h> &&d<b<i>, i>);
> +};
> +template <typename l, typename m> e(l, m)->e<l, m>;
> +template <typename l, typename m, typename j>
> +auto k(l &&, const j &, m &&) noexcept(d<b<l>, l> &&d<b<m>, m>);
> +int main() {
> + e(0, [] {});
> +}
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-03-28 20:04 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-03-07 22:42 C++ PATCH for c++/89612 - ICE with member friend template with noexcept Marek Polacek
2019-03-14 13:08 ` Marek Polacek
2019-03-14 20:24 ` Jason Merrill
2019-03-19 16:02 ` Marek Polacek
2019-03-21 20:05 ` Jason Merrill
2019-03-28 19:23 ` Marek Polacek
2019-03-28 20:08 ` Jason Merrill
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).