From: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
To: Nathaniel Shead <nathanieloshead@gmail.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] c++: Check for indirect change of active union member in constexpr [PR101631,PR102286]
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 16:46:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ffec849c-9f06-437c-adf8-d3830bb3cf1e@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <65235160.170a0220.4cbca.5c7d@mx.google.com>
On 10/8/23 21:03, Nathaniel Shead wrote:
> Ping for https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-September/631203.html
>
> + && (TREE_CODE (t) == MODIFY_EXPR
> + /* Also check if initializations have implicit change of active
> + member earlier up the access chain. */
> + || !refs->is_empty())
I'm not sure what the cumulative point of these two tests is. TREE_CODE
(t) will be either MODIFY_EXPR or INIT_EXPR, and either should be OK.
As I understand it, the problematic case is something like
constexpr-union2.C, where we're also looking at a MODIFY_EXPR. So what
is this check doing?
Incidentally, I think constexpr-union6.C could use a test where we pass
&u.s to a function other than construct_at, and then try (and fail) to
assign to the b member from that function.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-09 20:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-29 13:35 [PATCH] c++: Check for indirect change of active union member in constexpr [PR101631] Nathaniel Shead
2023-08-30 20:28 ` Jason Merrill
2023-09-01 12:22 ` [PATCH v2] c++: Catch " Nathaniel Shead
2023-09-17 12:46 ` Nathaniel Shead
2023-09-19 21:25 ` Jason Merrill
2023-09-20 0:55 ` Nathaniel Shead
2023-09-20 19:23 ` Jason Merrill
2023-09-21 13:41 ` [PATCH v3] " Nathaniel Shead
2023-09-22 13:21 ` Jason Merrill
2023-09-22 15:01 ` [PATCH v4] c++: Check for indirect change of active union member in constexpr [PR101631,PR102286] Nathaniel Shead
2023-09-23 0:38 ` Nathaniel Shead
2023-09-23 6:40 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-09-23 7:30 ` [PATCH] libstdc++: Ensure active union member is correctly set Nathaniel Shead
2023-09-23 10:52 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-09-27 14:13 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-09-28 23:25 ` Nathaniel Shead
2023-09-29 9:32 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-09-29 15:06 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-09-29 16:29 ` Nathaniel Shead
2023-09-29 16:46 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-10-21 14:45 ` Jonathan Wakely
2023-10-09 1:03 ` [PATCH v4] c++: Check for indirect change of active union member in constexpr [PR101631,PR102286] Nathaniel Shead
2023-10-09 20:46 ` Jason Merrill [this message]
2023-10-10 13:48 ` [PATCH v5] " Nathaniel Shead
2023-10-12 8:53 ` [PATCH v6] " Nathaniel Shead
2023-10-12 20:24 ` Jason Merrill
2023-10-12 22:05 ` Nathaniel Shead
2023-10-20 3:23 ` 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=ffec849c-9f06-437c-adf8-d3830bb3cf1e@redhat.com \
--to=jason@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=nathanieloshead@gmail.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).