This was a simple typo in strip_typedefs_expr, where we were iterating but then building a new list consisting entirely of the first element.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk, 8, 7.
commit 1cab1ce37320aac67d8fbf88d10930f5c769cfb1 Author: Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com> Date: Mon Jul 2 15:09:58 2018 -0400 PR c++/86378 - functional cast in noexcept-specifier. * tree.c (strip_typedefs_expr) [TREE_LIST]: Fix iteration. diff --git a/gcc/cp/tree.c b/gcc/cp/tree.c index 361248d4b52..b1333f55e39 100644 --- a/gcc/cp/tree.c +++ b/gcc/cp/tree.c @@ -1735,9 +1735,9 @@ strip_typedefs_expr (tree t, bool *remove_attributes) tree it; for (it = t; it; it = TREE_CHAIN (it)) { - tree val = strip_typedefs_expr (TREE_VALUE (t), remove_attributes); + tree val = strip_typedefs_expr (TREE_VALUE (it), remove_attributes); vec_safe_push (vec, val); - if (val != TREE_VALUE (t)) + if (val != TREE_VALUE (it)) changed = true; gcc_assert (TREE_PURPOSE (it) == NULL_TREE); } diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept33.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept33.C new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..c5a03de38dd --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/noexcept33.C @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ +// PR c++/86378 +// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } } + +struct Pepper {}; +struct Apple { Apple(int) {} }; + +struct Combination : Apple, Pepper +{ + Combination(Pepper p, Apple a) + : Apple(a), Pepper(p) + {} +}; + +struct MyCombination +{ + using Spice = Pepper; + using Fruit = Apple; + + Combination combination; + + template<typename T> + constexpr MyCombination(T&& t) + noexcept(noexcept(Combination(Spice(), Fruit(t)))) + : combination(Spice(), Fruit(t)) + {} +}; + +MyCombination obj(Apple(4));