This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[C++ PATCH] Fix build_noexcept_spec ICE (PR c++/54207)
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 08:24:42 +0100
- Subject: [C++ PATCH] Fix build_noexcept_spec ICE (PR c++/54207)
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
Hi!
We ICE on the following testcase, because perform_implicit_conversion_flags
doesn't guarantee the type of the returned value is boolean_type_node,
if it is some other type compatible with it (in the same_type_p sense),
then simple == boolean_true_node and == boolean_false_node comparisons
don't really work. Either we could fold_convert it to boolean_type_node
if INTEGER_CST first, or we can use operand_equal_p to compare instead of
pointer comparisons. The INTEGER_CSTs checks in the patch are to avoid
calling operand_equal_p unnecessarily, but could be dropped if you prefer it
that way.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
2012-12-06 Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
PR c++/54207
* except.c (build_noexcept_spec): Avoid direct comparison
with boolean_true_node or boolean_false_node, instead use
operand_equal_p.
* pt.c (tsubst_exception_specification): Likewise.
* typeck2.c (merge_exception_specifiers): Likewise.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept18.C: New test.
--- gcc/cp/except.c.jj 2012-11-19 14:41:16.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/except.c 2012-12-04 11:51:38.157724775 +0100
@@ -1316,15 +1316,18 @@ build_noexcept_spec (tree expr, int comp
LOOKUP_NORMAL);
expr = cxx_constant_value (expr);
}
- if (expr == boolean_true_node)
- return noexcept_true_spec;
- else if (expr == boolean_false_node)
- return noexcept_false_spec;
- else if (expr == error_mark_node)
+ if (TREE_CODE (expr) == INTEGER_CST)
+ {
+ if (operand_equal_p (expr, boolean_true_node, 0))
+ return noexcept_true_spec;
+ else if (operand_equal_p (expr, boolean_false_node, 0))
+ return noexcept_false_spec;
+ }
+ if (expr == error_mark_node)
return error_mark_node;
else
{
- gcc_assert (processing_template_decl || expr == error_mark_node
+ gcc_assert (processing_template_decl
|| TREE_CODE (expr) == DEFERRED_NOEXCEPT);
return build_tree_list (expr, NULL_TREE);
}
--- gcc/cp/pt.c.jj 2012-12-01 00:50:33.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/pt.c 2012-12-04 11:53:32.007085060 +0100
@@ -10840,8 +10840,14 @@ tsubst_exception_specification (tree fnt
{
/* A noexcept-specifier. */
tree expr = TREE_PURPOSE (specs);
- if (expr == boolean_true_node || expr == boolean_false_node)
- new_specs = expr;
+ if (TREE_CODE (expr) == INTEGER_CST)
+ {
+ if (operand_equal_p (expr, boolean_true_node, 0)
+ || operand_equal_p (expr, boolean_false_node, 0))
+ new_specs = expr;
+ }
+ if (new_specs != NULL_TREE)
+ ;
else if (defer_ok)
{
/* Defer instantiation of noexcept-specifiers to avoid
--- gcc/cp/typeck2.c.jj 2012-11-19 14:41:16.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/typeck2.c 2012-12-04 11:54:34.184735478 +0100
@@ -1871,7 +1871,7 @@ merge_exception_specifiers (tree list, t
/* If ADD is a deferred noexcept, we must have been called from
process_subob_fn. For implicitly declared functions, we build up
a list of functions to consider at instantiation time. */
- if (noex == boolean_true_node)
+ if (operand_equal_p (noex, boolean_true_node, 0))
noex = NULL_TREE;
gcc_assert (fn && (!noex || is_overloaded_fn (noex)));
noex = build_overload (fn, noex);
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept18.C.jj 2012-12-04 11:56:32.910049983 +0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept18.C 2012-12-04 11:55:50.000000000 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+// PR c++/54207
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-std=c++11" }
+
+typedef bool B;
+constexpr B foo () { return true; }
+
+void
+bar () noexcept (foo ())
+{
+}
Jakub