From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23349 invoked by alias); 18 Sep 2019 03:59:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 23332 invoked by uid 89); 18 Sep 2019 03:59:08 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-14.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=HX-Languages-Length:667 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 03:59:07 +0000 Received: from mail-io1-f72.google.com (mail-io1-f72.google.com [209.85.166.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 202F2C057F31 for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 03:59:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io1-f72.google.com with SMTP id g126so9176548iof.3 for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2019 20:59:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.118.78] ([72.142.123.242]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h3sm3184010iol.73.2019.09.17.20.59.03 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 17 Sep 2019 20:59:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: C++ PATCH for c++/91678 - wrong error with decltype and location wrapper To: Marek Polacek Cc: GCC Patches References: <20190906022455.GC14737@redhat.com> <1960c4f6-2d6f-f62c-e985-3885583110d6@redhat.com> <20190916181227.GQ14737@redhat.com> From: Jason Merrill Message-ID: <37c8b1f9-8643-5e89-2bad-af6b76d7b8d1@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 03:59:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190916181227.GQ14737@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-09/txt/msg01042.txt.bz2 On 9/16/19 1:12 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 10:18:29AM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: >> On 9/5/19 9:24 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: >>> They use >>> non_lvalue_loc, but that won't create a NON_LVALUE_EXPR wrapper around a location >>> wrapper. >> >> That seems like the bug. maybe_lvalue_p should be true for >> VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR. > > That makes sense but it breaks in tsubst_* which doesn't expect a > NON_LVALUE_EXPR wrapped around a location wrapper. Hmm, why would we get that in a template when we don't get NON_LVALUE_EXPR wrapped around other lvalue nodes? Jason