From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
To: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] c++: Incremental fix for g++.dg/gomp/for-21.C [PR84469]
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 16:51:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y4d77q1VhYaOVFVm@tucnak> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y4aCK+GpGBYP7vwS@tucnak>
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 11:05:33PM +0100, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 04:38:50PM -0500, Jason Merrill wrote:
> > > --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gomp/for-21.C.jj 2020-01-12 11:54:37.178401867 +0100
> > > +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gomp/for-21.C 2022-11-29 13:06:59.038410557 +0100
> > > @@ -54,9 +54,9 @@ void
> > > f6 (S (&a)[10])
> > > {
> > > #pragma omp for collapse (2)
> > > - for (auto [i, j, k] : a) // { dg-error "use of 'i' before deduction of 'auto'" "" { target *-*-* } .-1 }
> > > + for (auto [i, j, k] : a) // { dg-error "use of 'i' before deduction of 'auto'" }
> > > for (int l = i; l < j; l += k) // { dg-error "use of 'j' before deduction of 'auto'" }
> > > - ; // { dg-error "use of 'k' before deduction of 'auto'" "" { target *-*-* } .-3 }
> > > + ; // { dg-error "use of 'k' before deduction of 'auto'" "" { target *-*-* } .-1 }
> >
> > Hmm, this error is surprising: since the initializer is non-dependent, we
> > should have deduced immediately. I'd expect the same error as in the
> > non-structured-binding cases, "* expression refers to iteration variable".
>
> The reason was just to be consistent what is (unfortunately) emitted
> in the other cases (!processing_template_decl or type dependent).
> I guess I could try how much work would it be to deduce it sooner, but
> generally it is pretty corner case, people rarely do this in OpenMP code.
I had a look at that today, but it would be pretty hard. The thing is
we must emit all the associated code for all the range for loops in
OpenMP loops at a different spot. So, the only possibility I see would
be if we during parsing of a range for loop inside of the OpenMP loop nest
we don't do the cp_finish_omp_range_for stuff to avoid e.g. cp_finish_decl,
but instead
build_x_indirect_ref (input_location, begin, RO_UNARY_STAR,
NULL_TREE, tf_none)
and if that gives a non-dependent type, temporarily overwrite TREE_TYPE
of the decl and if it is structured binding, temporarily
++processing_template_decl and cp_finish_decomp, then after parsing all the
associated loop headers we revert that (and ditto for instantiation of
OpenMP loops).
Jakub
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-30 15:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-29 12:32 Jakub Jelinek
2022-11-29 21:38 ` Jason Merrill
2022-11-29 22:05 ` Jakub Jelinek
2022-11-30 15:51 ` Jakub Jelinek [this message]
2022-11-30 18:52 ` Jason Merrill
2022-12-01 10:32 ` [PATCH] c++, v2: " Jakub Jelinek
2022-12-01 18:21 ` Jason Merrill
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Y4d77q1VhYaOVFVm@tucnak \
--to=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jason@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).