From: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
To: Patrick Palka <ppalka@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] c++: ICE on loopy var tmpl auto deduction [PR109300]
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2023 16:19:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f0e1c650-c8e9-0e53-9ab9-12fbbafaa955@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4329ac60-d2cf-4014-503d-9c6bf0cea723@idea>
On 4/3/23 12:28, Patrick Palka wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2023, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
>> On 3/28/23 13:37, Patrick Palka wrote:
>>> Now that we resolve non-dependent variable template-ids ahead of time,
>>> cp_finish_decl needs to handle a new invalid situation: we can end up
>>> trying to instantiate a variable template with deduced return type
>>> before we fully parsed (and attached) its initializer.
>>>
>>> Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this OK for
>>> trunK?
>>>
>>> PR c++/109300
>>>
>>> gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>> * decl.cc (cp_finish_decl): Diagnose ordinary auto deduction
>>> with no initializer instead of asserting.
>>>
>>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>> * g++.dg/cpp1y/var-templ79.C: New test.
>>> ---
>>> gcc/cp/decl.cc | 15 ++++++++++++++-
>>> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/var-templ79.C | 5 +++++
>>> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/var-templ79.C
>>>
>>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.cc b/gcc/cp/decl.cc
>>> index 20b980f68c8..2c91693b99d 100644
>>> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.cc
>>> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.cc
>>> @@ -8276,7 +8276,20 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool
>>> init_const_expr_p,
>>> return;
>>> }
>>> - gcc_assert (CLASS_PLACEHOLDER_TEMPLATE (auto_node));
>>> + if (CLASS_PLACEHOLDER_TEMPLATE (auto_node))
>>> + /* Class deduction with no initializer is OK. */;
>>> + else
>>> + {
>>> + /* Ordinary auto deduction without an initializer, a situation
>>> + which grokdeclarator already catches and rejects for the most
>>> + part. But we can still get here if we're instantiating a
>>> + variable template before we've fully parsed (and attached)
>>> its
>>> + initializer, e.g. template<class> auto x = x<int>; */
>>
>> In the case of recursively dependent instantiation I'd hope to have an
>> error_mark_node initializer, rather than none?
>
> Do you mean setting the initializer to error_mark_node after the fact, e.g.
>
> @@ -8288,7 +8297,7 @@ cp_finish_decl (tree decl, tree init, bool init_const_expr_p,
> error_at (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (decl),
> "declaration of %q#D has no initializer", decl);
> TREE_TYPE (decl) = error_mark_node;
> - return;
> + init = error_mark_node;
> }
> }
> d_init = init;
>
> or before the fact, i.e. setting DECL_INITIAL to error_mark_node as a
> sentinel value for detecting recursion before we begin parsing a variable
> initializer? The former should work I suppose, but the latter is
> problematic because we also call cp_finish_decl with init=error_mark_node
> when the initializer is generally invalid, so by overloading the meaning
> of error_mark_node here and checking for it from cp_finish_decl we would
> end up emitting a bogus extra diagnostic in a bunch of cases e.g.
> g++.dg/pr53055.C:
>
> int i = p ->* p ; // invalid initializer
>
> I guess we would need to use a different sentinel value for detecting
> recursion, or expose and inspect the 'lambda_scope' stack which already
> keeps track of whether we're in the middle of a variable initializer...
> Dunno if it's worth it just for sake of a better diagnostic for this
> corner case, I notice e.g. Clang doesn't give a great diagnostic either:
>
> src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/var-templ79.C:5:6: error: declaration of variable 'x' with deduced type 'auto' requires an initializer
> auto x = x<int>; // { dg-error "" }
> ^
Yeah, let's just go with your patch, thanks.
>>
>>> + error_at (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (decl),
>>> + "declaration of %q#D has no initializer", decl);
>>> + TREE_TYPE (decl) = error_mark_node;
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>> }
>>> d_init = init;
>>> if (d_init)
>>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/var-templ79.C
>>> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/var-templ79.C
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 00000000000..3c0d276153a
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp1y/var-templ79.C
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
>>> +// PR c++/109300
>>> +// { dg-do compile { target c++14 } }
>>> +
>>> +template<class>
>>> +auto x = x<int>; // { dg-error "" }
>>
>>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-03 20:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-28 17:37 Patrick Palka
2023-03-29 18:17 ` Jason Merrill
2023-04-03 16:28 ` Patrick Palka
2023-04-03 20:19 ` Jason Merrill [this message]
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=f0e1c650-c8e9-0e53-9ab9-12fbbafaa955@redhat.com \
--to=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=ppalka@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).