[Bug c++/105321] [9/10/11 Regression] "non-constant condition" issued for function containing a short-circuited unevaluated non-constant expression
cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org
Fri Apr 22 21:01:01 GMT 2022
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105321
--- Comment #9 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The releases/gcc-11 branch has been updated by Marek Polacek
<mpolacek@gcc.gnu.org>:
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:afec66b054a7603ef394dc712ccbba37ae645fd9
commit r11-9930-gafec66b054a7603ef394dc712ccbba37ae645fd9
Author: Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
Date: Wed Apr 20 16:02:52 2022 -0400
c++: wrong error with constexpr COMPOUND_EXPR [PR105321]
Here we issue a bogus error for the first assert in the test. Therein
we have
<retval> = (void) (VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<bool>(yes) || handle_error ());,
VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<int>(value);
which has a COMPOUND_EXPR, so we get to cxx_eval_constant_expression
<case COMPOUND_EXPR>. The problem here is that we call
7044 /* Check that the LHS is constant and then discard it. */
7045 cxx_eval_constant_expression (ctx, op0,
7046 true, non_constant_p,
overflow_p,
7047 jump_target);
where lval is always true, so the PARM_DECL 'yes' is not evaluated into
its value.
Fixed by always passing false for 'lval' in cxx_eval_logical_expression;
there's no case where we actually expect an lvalue from a TRUTH_*.
PR c++/105321
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* constexpr.c (cxx_eval_logical_expression): Always pass false for
lval
to cxx_eval_constant_expression.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-105321.C: New test.
(cherry picked from commit 93b65ed9706e2ceb4be7b28c9ff9be759e68a614)
More information about the Gcc-bugs
mailing list