public inbox for libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
To: "François Dumont" <frs.dumont@gmail.com>
Cc: "libstdc++" <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org>,
	gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][_GLIBCXX_DEBUG] Fix std::__niter_base behavior
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 18:40:09 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACb0b4=LwgHB9Mk5a=yK7V-jv-WnTGQAEGoUCHgZfRipDM84ng@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9a6615ee-0a2c-4bcb-ad13-ba810edb9ee1@gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4647 bytes --]

On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 at 18:38, François Dumont <frs.dumont@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On 15/02/2024 14:17, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 at 21:48, François Dumont <frs.dumont@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 14/02/2024 20:44, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 at 18:39, François Dumont <frs.dumont@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> libstdc++: [_GLIBCXX_DEBUG] Fix std::__niter_base behavior
>>>
>>> std::__niter_base is used in _GLIBCXX_DEBUG mode to remove
>>> _Safe_iterator<>
>>> wrapper on random access iterators. But doing so it should also preserve
>>> original
>>> behavior to remove __normal_iterator wrapper.
>>>
>>> libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>>>
>>>      * include/bits/stl_algobase.h (std::__niter_base): Redefine the
>>> overload
>>>      definitions for __gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator.
>>>      * include/debug/safe_iterator.tcc (std::__niter_base): Adapt
>>> declarations.
>>>
>>> Ok to commit once all tests completed (still need to check pre-c++11) ?
>>>
>>
>>
>> The declaration in  include/bits/stl_algobase.h has a noexcept-specifier
>> but the definition in include/debug/safe_iterator.tcc does not have one -
>> that seems wrong (I'm surprised it even compiles).
>>
>> It does !
>>
>
> The diagnostic is suppressed without -Wsystem-headers:
>
> /home/jwakely/gcc/14/include/c++/14.0.1/debug/safe_iterator.tcc:255:5: warning:
> declaration of 'template<class _Ite, class _Seq> constexpr decltype
> (std::__
> niter_base(declval<_Ite>())) std::__niter_base(const
> __gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Iterator, _Sequence,
> random_access_iterator_tag>&)' has a different except
> ion specifier [-Wsystem-headers]
>  255 |     __niter_base(const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite, _Seq,
>      |     ^~~~~~~~~~~~
> /home/jwakely/gcc/14/include/c++/14.0.1/bits/stl_algobase.h:335:5: note: from
> previous declaration 'template<class _Ite, class _Seq> constexpr decltype
> (std
> ::__niter_base(declval<_Ite>())) std::__niter_base(const
> __gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Iterator, _Sequence,
> random_access_iterator_tag>&) noexcept (noexcept
> (is_nothrow_copy_constructible<decltype
> (std::__niter_base(declval<_Ite>()))>::value))'
>  335 |     __niter_base(const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite, _Seq,
>      |     ^~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
> It's a hard error with Clang though:
>
> deb.cc:7:10: error: call to '__niter_base' is ambiguous
>
>
> Yes, I eventually got the error too, I hadn't run enough tests yet.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> I thought it was only necessary at declaration, and I also had troubles
>> doing it right at definition because of the interaction with the auto and
>> ->.
>>
>
> The trailing-return-type has to come after the noexcept-specifier.
>
>
>
>> Now simplified and consistent in this new proposal.
>>
>>
>> Just using std::is_nothrow_copy_constructible<_Ite> seems simpler, that
>> will be true for __normal_iterator<I, C> if
>> is_nothrow_copy_constructible<I> is true.
>>
>> Ok
>>
>>
>> The definition in include/debug/safe_iterator.tcc should use
>> std::declval<_Ite>() not declval<_Ite>(). Is there any reason why the
>> definition uses a late-specified-return-type (i.e. auto and ->) when the
>> declaration doesn't?
>>
>>
>> I initially plan to use '->
>> std::decltype(std::__niter_base(__it.base()))' but this did not compile,
>> ambiguity issue. So I resort to using std::declval and I could have then
>> done it the same way as declaration, done now.
>>
>> Attached is what I'm testing, ok to commit once fully tested ?
>>
>
> OK, thanks.
>
> Thanks for validation but I have a problem to test for c++98.
>
> When I do:
>
> make CXXFLAGS=-std=c++98 check-debug
>

That doesn't work any more, see
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/test.html#test.run.permutations



> I see in debug/libstdc++.log for example:
>
> Executing on host: /home/fdumont/dev/gcc/build/./gcc/xg++ -shared-libgcc
> ... -mshstk -std=c++98 -g -O2 -DLOCALEDIR="." -nostdinc++
> -I/home/fdumont/dev/gcc/...
> /home/fdumont/dev/gcc/git/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/25_algorithms/copy/3.cc
> -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG   -std=gnu++17  -include bits/stdc++.h ...  -lm  -o
> ./3.exe    (timeout = 360)
>
> The -std=c++98 is there but later comes the -std=gnu++17 so I think it
> runs in C++17, no ?
>
> I also tried the documented alternative:
>
> make check 'RUNTESTFLAGS=--target_board=unix/-O3\"{-std=gnu++98,-std=gnu++11,-std=gnu++14}\"'
>
>
> but same problem, -std=gnu++17 comes last.
>
> I'll try to rebuild all from scratch but I won't commit soon then.
>
>
>

  reply	other threads:[~2024-02-15 18:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-14 18:39 François Dumont
2024-02-14 19:44 ` Jonathan Wakely
2024-02-14 21:48   ` François Dumont
2024-02-15 13:17     ` Jonathan Wakely
2024-02-15 18:38       ` François Dumont
2024-02-15 18:40         ` Jonathan Wakely [this message]
2024-02-17 14:14           ` François Dumont
2024-02-19  7:07             ` Stephan Bergmann
2024-02-19  8:12               ` Jonathan Wakely
2024-02-19  8:21                 ` Jonathan Wakely
2024-02-19 18:39                   ` François Dumont
2024-02-20 18:42                   ` François Dumont
2024-02-20 19:27                     ` Jonathan Wakely
2024-02-19 17:59               ` François Dumont

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='CACb0b4=LwgHB9Mk5a=yK7V-jv-WnTGQAEGoUCHgZfRipDM84ng@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=jwakely@redhat.com \
    --cc=frs.dumont@gmail.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org \
    /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).