Hi!

The comment says that trying to fold VOID_TYPE_P COND_EXPRs is not worth
bothering, but as the following testcase shows, that is not the case.
fold_ternary can optimize COND_EXPRs where the condition is constant and
the unused branch doesn't have any labels, and not folding it early means
bogus warnings afterwards.

Fixed thusly, bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for
trunk?

2017-11-24  Jakub Jelinek  <ja...@redhat.com>

        PR c++/81675
        * cp-gimplify.c (cp_fold) <case COND_EXPR>: Don't return immediately
        for VOID_TYPE_P COND_EXPRs, instead fold the operands and if op0 is
        INTEGER_CST, ensure that both op1 and op2 are non-NULL and fall
        through into normal folding, otherwise just rebuild x if any op
        changed.

        * g++.dg/warn/pr81675.C: New test.

--- gcc/cp/cp-gimplify.c.jj     2017-11-21 20:23:01.000000000 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/cp-gimplify.c        2017-11-24 11:09:51.879647584 +0100
@@ -2299,13 +2299,6 @@ cp_fold (tree x)
 
     case VEC_COND_EXPR:
     case COND_EXPR:
-
-      /* Don't bother folding a void condition, since it can't produce a
-        constant value.  Also, some statement-level uses of COND_EXPR leave
-        one of the branches NULL, so folding would crash.  */
-      if (VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (x)))
-       return x;
-
       loc = EXPR_LOCATION (x);
       op0 = cp_fold_rvalue (TREE_OPERAND (x, 0));
       op1 = cp_fold (TREE_OPERAND (x, 1));
@@ -2319,6 +2312,29 @@ cp_fold (tree x)
          if (!VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (op2)))
            op2 = cp_truthvalue_conversion (op2);
        }
+      else if (VOID_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (x)))
+       {
+         if (TREE_CODE (op0) == INTEGER_CST)
+           {
+             /* If the condition is constant, fold can fold away
+                the COND_EXPR.  If some statement-level uses of COND_EXPR
+                have one of the branches NULL, avoid folding crash.  */
+             if (!op1)
+               op1 = build_empty_stmt (loc);
+             if (!op2)
+               op2 = build_empty_stmt (loc);
+           }
+         else
+           {
+             /* Otherwise, don't bother folding a void condition, since
+                it can't produce a constant value.  */
+             if (op0 != TREE_OPERAND (x, 0)
+                 || op1 != TREE_OPERAND (x, 1)
+                 || op2 != TREE_OPERAND (x, 2))
+               x = build3_loc (loc, code, TREE_TYPE (x), op0, op1, op2);
+             break;
+           }
+       }
 
       if (op0 != TREE_OPERAND (x, 0)
          || op1 != TREE_OPERAND (x, 1)
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/pr81675.C.jj      2017-11-24 11:12:13.962912829 
+0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/pr81675.C 2017-11-24 11:11:56.000000000 +0100
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+// PR c++/81675
+// { dg-do compile }
+// { dg-options "-Wall" }
+
+struct S
+{
+  ~S () __attribute__((noreturn));
+  int a;
+};
+
+int
+foo ()
+{
+  false ? 5 : S ().a;
+}

        Jakub

Reply via email to