| Message ID | 20170802073801.GH2123@tucnak |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 3:38 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote: > I've bootstrapped/regtested the following patch last night and committed > after preapproval from Nathan, though of course a question is if > lookup_fnfields_slot/lookup_fnfields_slot_nolazy shouldn't have > if (!CLASS_TYPE_P (type)) return NULL_TREE; or > gcc_assert (!CLASS_TYPE_P (type)); > readded to the beginning of those functions. It seems that we already ICE if we call it with a non-class type, so adding an assert would just document that behavior? Jason
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 12:50:36PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote: > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 3:38 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote: > > I've bootstrapped/regtested the following patch last night and committed > > after preapproval from Nathan, though of course a question is if > > lookup_fnfields_slot/lookup_fnfields_slot_nolazy shouldn't have > > if (!CLASS_TYPE_P (type)) return NULL_TREE; or > > gcc_assert (!CLASS_TYPE_P (type)); > > readded to the beginning of those functions. > > It seems that we already ICE if we call it with a non-class type, so > adding an assert would just document that behavior? CLASSTYPE_METHOD_VEC doesn't exactly check CLASS_TYPE_P if checking, it just requires that LANG_TYPE_CLASS_CHECK is non-NULL (dunno if there are any non-CLASS_TYPE_P types that have it non-NULL, or any CLASS_TYPE_P types that have it NULL). But yes, for checking builds it would be primarily documentation, for checking builds likely too, because if TYPE_LANG_SPECIFIC is NULL, then CLASSTYPE_METHOD_VEC will dereference NULL. Jakub
--- gcc/cp/call.c.jj 2017-07-24 10:58:10.000000000 +0200 +++ gcc/cp/call.c 2017-08-01 22:40:37.134412941 +0200 @@ -3735,7 +3735,7 @@ build_user_type_conversion_1 (tree totyp gcc_assert (!MAYBE_CLASS_TYPE_P (fromtype) || !MAYBE_CLASS_TYPE_P (totype) || !DERIVED_FROM_P (totype, fromtype)); - if (MAYBE_CLASS_TYPE_P (totype)) + if (CLASS_TYPE_P (totype)) /* Use lookup_fnfields_slot instead of lookup_fnfields to avoid creating a garbage BASELINK; constructors can't be inherited. */ ctors = lookup_fnfields_slot (totype, complete_ctor_identifier); --- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wshadow-compatible-local-2.C.jj 2017-08-01 22:44:41.250901144 +0200 +++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wshadow-compatible-local-2.C 2017-08-01 22:44:08.000000000 +0200 @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +// PR c++/81640 +// { dg-do compile } +// { dg-options "-Wshadow=compatible-local" } + +struct A {}; +struct B { operator bool () const { return true; } }; + +template <typename T> +void +foo () +{ + T d, e; + if (e) + A d; +} + +void +bar () +{ + foo <B> (); +}