From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 872553858D35 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 14:10:00 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 872553858D35 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1678975800; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ug1L4dTxD0PAK0iXqNR7Ko4ZnS5jjzf9ZONgcy80XH4=; b=AX8PodbBjGQclOsK7ux2Oyzc6HWEL/FhBbXYl/YTvbuquE/AefHeGYTvA+9K6bVzi9Qa8U /A0Q1l6hot9YSLWiAoQQ/arLpnTCtKgAMKG1GovynEmMcvqKiherYfY5mpLD+FGh7EJWn0 FEsJLL6OQ9pkz9QYzxmFu9x44pGfU3w= Received: from mail-qv1-f69.google.com (mail-qv1-f69.google.com [209.85.219.69]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-50-JyV2bqCNMKiFI-b-y3R5pA-1; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 10:09:49 -0400 X-MC-Unique: JyV2bqCNMKiFI-b-y3R5pA-1 Received: by mail-qv1-f69.google.com with SMTP id a15-20020a0562140c2f00b005ad28a23cffso1107558qvd.6 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 07:09:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678975789; h=mime-version:references:message-id:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:date :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ug1L4dTxD0PAK0iXqNR7Ko4ZnS5jjzf9ZONgcy80XH4=; b=lUYhbGIofat9hdSSqn6Nj3UYrmOzCTb+eoSAwi3VZnr8G886zFK5LvIZKMQXxHuUeg WXF2DXAlkofTt0rLkwjxzIdjBU89nf0b9VAZEwqcx8hgQ0JXvf2fS7XX5leqpJvyXJhe mCowbxRwimEg8OpW6S2aCr02nAuAzFFPw2gQuhH2o8R+o9oeyeGfDzTC3NLfCqMMmw1V n6mQELcMEL3h+GN4R2iTRwsriIKXDdst0HFpPOoRTT75WUuhAlHPOZN41oXpVxGXM1CO k8vuD7uT/D5TG9dVLiWBbSxhjb5EKpEC+LfXhzq3TL8BjlvQ0tHmkq4MuFigFKKqVe4C Wo9A== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWIdb9A1KExqZNjtAcdaBGOudmMaFs1ot0q5pC/CaPy3U12Ipk8 ElNxT+8UVaZufnEI7hmj4Qm2vGuBeU3g4oj5d6uoUFL6mwyrYL7dMNJFipIH7GjlmWeBeht8mZ4 Y+y5xr652ebuD7YKGVw== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7f03:0:b0:3bf:d372:a5a4 with SMTP id f3-20020ac87f03000000b003bfd372a5a4mr5235995qtk.50.1678975789125; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 07:09:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set9NKBNFO6tCeneaNczqdvMyW057dPBwrskflNQlzVFdOSHRDHvcUPnpZ5tVs5E91NuT42ccUQ== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7f03:0:b0:3bf:d372:a5a4 with SMTP id f3-20020ac87f03000000b003bfd372a5a4mr5235969qtk.50.1678975788775; Thu, 16 Mar 2023 07:09:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.130] (ool-457670bb.dyn.optonline.net. [69.118.112.187]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w7-20020ac86b07000000b003b9bca1e093sm5784270qts.27.2023.03.16.07.09.47 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Mar 2023 07:09:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Patrick Palka X-Google-Original-From: Patrick Palka Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 10:09:47 -0400 (EDT) To: Patrick Palka cc: Jason Merrill , Marek Polacek , GCC Patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] c++: noexcept and copy elision [PR109030] In-Reply-To: <5720dde1-3aae-0fc0-44b5-2d992951c55b@idea> Message-ID: References: <20230306235957.390533-1-polacek@redhat.com> <233db53c-67cb-37cf-92ef-620b3678d86f@idea> <5720dde1-3aae-0fc0-44b5-2d992951c55b@idea> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,GIT_PATCH_0,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Wed, 15 Mar 2023, Patrick Palka wrote: > On Thu, 9 Mar 2023, Jason Merrill wrote: > > > On 3/9/23 14:32, Patrick Palka wrote: > > > On Mon, 6 Mar 2023, Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches wrote: > > > > > > > When processing a noexcept, constructors aren't elided: build_over_call > > > > has > > > > /* It's unsafe to elide the constructor when handling > > > > a noexcept-expression, it may evaluate to the wrong > > > > value (c++/53025). */ > > > > && (force_elide || cp_noexcept_operand == 0)) > > > > so the assert I added recently needs to be relaxed a little bit. > > > > > > > > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk? > > > > > > > > PR c++/109030 > > > > > > > > gcc/cp/ChangeLog: > > > > > > > > * constexpr.cc (cxx_eval_call_expression): Relax assert. > > > > > > > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > > > > > > > * g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept77.C: New test. > > > > --- > > > > gcc/cp/constexpr.cc | 6 +++++- > > > > gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept77.C | 9 +++++++++ > > > > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept77.C > > > > > > > > diff --git a/gcc/cp/constexpr.cc b/gcc/cp/constexpr.cc > > > > index 364695b762c..5384d0e8e46 100644 > > > > --- a/gcc/cp/constexpr.cc > > > > +++ b/gcc/cp/constexpr.cc > > > > @@ -2869,7 +2869,11 @@ cxx_eval_call_expression (const constexpr_ctx *ctx, > > > > tree t, > > > > /* We used to shortcut trivial constructor/op= here, but nowadays > > > > we can only get a trivial function here with > > > > -fno-elide-constructors. */ > > > > - gcc_checking_assert (!trivial_fn_p (fun) || !flag_elide_constructors); > > > > + gcc_checking_assert (!trivial_fn_p (fun) > > > > + || !flag_elide_constructors > > > > + /* We don't elide constructors when processing > > > > + a noexcept-expression. */ > > > > + || cp_noexcept_operand); > > > > > > It seems weird that we're performing constant evaluation within an > > > unevaluated operand. Would it make sense to also fix this a second way > > > by avoiding constant evaluation from maybe_constant_init when > > > cp_unevaluated_operand && !manifestly_const_eval, like in > > > maybe_constant_value? > > > > Sounds good. > > Hmm, while working on this I noticed we currently don't reject a version of > g++.dg/cpp2a/constexpr-inst1.C that list initializes an aggregate instead of > int (ever since r12-4425-g1595fe44e11a96): > > struct A { int m; }; > template constexpr int f() { return T::value; } > template void h(decltype(A{B ? f() : 0})); // was int{...} > template void h(...); > void x() { > h(0); // OK? > } > > ISTM we should instantiate f here for the same reason we do in the > original version of the testcase, and for that to happen we need to > pass manifestly_const_eval=true in massage_init_elt. Does that seem > reasonable? > FWIW the reason this came up is because I tried contriving a testcase for the aforementioned maybe_constant_init change, and I came up with: struct __as_receiver { int empty_env; }; template constexpr int f(T t) { return t.fail; }; using type = decltype(__as_receiver{f(0)}); // OK, f no longer instantiated which we used to reject and afterwards accept. But since the elements of an initializer list are potentially constant evaluated, I wonder if that that means f should be instantiated here after all despite the unevaluated context? Here's the full patch for reference: -- >8 -- Subject: [PATCH] c++: maybe_constant_init and unevaluated operands [PR109030] This testcase in this PR (already fixed by r13-6526-ge4692319fd5fc7) illustrates that maybe_constant_init can be called on an unevaluated operand (from massage_init_elt), so this entry point should limit constant evaluation in that case, like maybe_constant_value does. PR c++/109030 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * constexpr.cc (maybe_constant_init_1): For an unevaluated non-manifestly-constant operand, don't constant evaluate and instead call fold_to_constant. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/cpp0x/decltype83.C: New test. --- gcc/cp/constexpr.cc | 2 ++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/decltype83.C | 14 ++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/decltype83.C diff --git a/gcc/cp/constexpr.cc b/gcc/cp/constexpr.cc index 8683c00596a..f325af375c8 100644 --- a/gcc/cp/constexpr.cc +++ b/gcc/cp/constexpr.cc @@ -8795,6 +8795,8 @@ maybe_constant_init_1 (tree t, tree decl, bool allow_non_constant, && (TREE_STATIC (decl) || DECL_EXTERNAL (decl))); if (is_static) manifestly_const_eval = true; + if (cp_unevaluated_operand && !manifestly_const_eval) + return fold_to_constant (t); t = cxx_eval_outermost_constant_expr (t, allow_non_constant, !is_static, mce_value (manifestly_const_eval), false, decl); diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/decltype83.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/decltype83.C new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..17005a92eb5 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/decltype83.C @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } } + +struct __as_receiver { + int empty_env; +}; + +template +constexpr int f(T t) { + return t.fail; +}; + +int main() { + using type = decltype(__as_receiver{f(0)}); // OK, f not instantiated +} -- 2.40.0