This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix PR c++/47172
Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> writes:
> On 02/10/2011 01:31 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>> + /* In a template scope, a call expression which
>> + id-expression is non-dependent is considered dependent if
>> + the implicit "this" is dependent. Note that the
>
> To be a bit clearer, the implicit 'this' is an argument even though
> our internal representation doesn't include it in *args, so we need to
> consider it specifically.
>
> OK.
I have re-worded the comment as below.
--
Dodji
>From db3f14b7693667b52b5e04dbfed3dc51fe6b752b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dodji Seketeli <dodji@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 10:05:36 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Fix PR c++/47172
gcc/cp/
PR c++/47172
* pt.c (finish_call_expr): Consider a call expression that has a
dependent "this" pointer as being dependent. Add comments.
(dependent_type_p, type_dependent_expression_p): Update comments.
gcc/testsuite/
* g++.dg/template/inherit6.C: New test.
---
gcc/cp/pt.c | 7 +++++--
gcc/cp/semantics.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/inherit6.C | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/inherit6.C
diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.c b/gcc/cp/pt.c
index d59f32a..746e295 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/pt.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/pt.c
@@ -17912,7 +17912,7 @@ dependent_type_p_r (tree type)
}
/* Returns TRUE if TYPE is dependent, in the sense of
- [temp.dep.type]. */
+ [temp.dep.type]. Note that a NULL type is considered dependent. */
bool
dependent_type_p (tree type)
@@ -18184,7 +18184,10 @@ value_dependent_expression_p (tree expression)
}
/* Returns TRUE if the EXPRESSION is type-dependent, in the sense of
- [temp.dep.expr]. */
+ [temp.dep.expr]. Note that an expression with no type is
+ considered dependent. Other parts of the compiler arrange for an
+ expression with type-dependent subexpressions to have no type, so
+ this function doesn't have be fully recursive. */
bool
type_dependent_expression_p (tree expression)
diff --git a/gcc/cp/semantics.c b/gcc/cp/semantics.c
index 58a59ee..a941b3b 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/semantics.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/semantics.c
@@ -2028,8 +2028,20 @@ finish_call_expr (tree fn, VEC(tree,gc) **args, bool disallow_virtual,
if (processing_template_decl)
{
+ /* If the call expression is dependent, build a CALL_EXPR node
+ with no type; type_dependent_expression_p recognizes
+ expressions with no type as being dependent. */
if (type_dependent_expression_p (fn)
- || any_type_dependent_arguments_p (*args))
+ || any_type_dependent_arguments_p (*args)
+ /* For a non-static member function, we need to specifically
+ test the type dependency of the "this" pointer because it
+ is not included in *ARGS even though it is considered to
+ be part of the list of arguments. Note that this is
+ related to CWG issues 515 and 1005. */
+ || (TREE_CODE (fn) == FUNCTION_DECL
+ && DECL_NONSTATIC_MEMBER_FUNCTION_P (fn)
+ && current_class_ref
+ && type_dependent_expression_p (current_class_ref)))
{
result = build_nt_call_vec (fn, *args);
KOENIG_LOOKUP_P (result) = koenig_p;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/inherit6.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/inherit6.C
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..241a68e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/inherit6.C
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+// Origin PR c++/47172
+// { dg-options "-std=c++0x" }
+// { dg-do compile }
+
+struct A
+{
+ int f() const;
+};
+
+template <class T>
+struct B : A { };
+
+template <class T>
+struct C : B<T>
+{
+ void g();
+};
+
+template <class T>
+void C<T>::g()
+{
+ A::f();
+}
--
1.7.3.4