On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 09:55:39PM +0530, Umesh Kalappa wrote:
> My bad Marek and thank you for pointing that out.
>
> Please find the attached correct one (pr52869.patch) .
Index: gcc/cp/ChangeLog
===================================================================
--- gcc/cp/ChangeLog (revision 266026)
+++ gcc/cp/ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
+2018-11-14 Kamlesh Kumar <kamleshbha...@gmail.com>
+
+ PR c++/52869
+ *parser.c () : restore the old current_class_{ptr,ref} by
+ inject_this_parameter().
+
So the correct CL entry would look like
2018-11-14 Kamlesh Kumar <kamleshbha...@gmail.com>
DR 1207
PR c++/52869
* parser.c (cp_parser_noexcept_specification_opt): Call
inject_this_parameter.
or so.
Index: gcc/cp/parser.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/cp/parser.c (revision 266026)
+++ gcc/cp/parser.c (working copy)
@@ -24615,11 +24615,24 @@
{
tree expr;
cp_lexer_consume_token (parser->lexer);
-
+
You're adding whitespaces where they shouldn't be. Let's avoid changes like
these.
if (cp_lexer_peek_token (parser->lexer)->type == CPP_OPEN_PAREN)
{
matching_parens parens;
parens.consume_open (parser);
+
+ if (current_class_type)
+ inject_this_parameter (current_class_type, TYPE_UNQUALIFIED);
+ else
+ {
+ /*clear the current_class_ptr for non class type , like
+ int foo() noexcept(*this)
+ {
+ return 1;
+ }
+ */
+ current_class_ptr = NULL_TREE;
+ }
I don't believe that's what Jason meant by restoring; I think you want
tree save_ccp = current_class_ptr;
tree save_ccr = current_class_ref;
inject_this_parameter (current_class_type, TYPE_UNQUALIFIED);
[...]
current_class_ptr = save_ccp;
current_class_ref = save_ccr;
In the future, if using diff, please also use the -p option.
Index: gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (revision 266026)
+++ gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog (working copy)
@@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
+2018-11-14 Kamlesh Kumar <kamleshbha...@gmail.com>
+
+ PR g++.dg/52869
+ * g++.dg/pr52869.C: New.
Should be "PR c++/52869".
Index: gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr52869.C
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr52869.C (nonexistent)
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/pr52869.C (working copy)
Maybe move the test to testsuite/g++.dg/DRs?
@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-O0 -g" } */
Why these options? I don't think you need -g.
+struct S {
+ void f() { }
+ void g() noexcept(noexcept(f())) { }
+ void h() noexcept(noexcept(this->f())) { }
+};
+
+struct Nyan {
+ constexpr Nyan &operator++() noexcept { return *this; }
+ constexpr void omg() noexcept(noexcept(++*this)) {}
+};
I was hoping you'd add also a test with 'this' in noexcept in a class template.
This test doesn't compile on all dialects:
FAIL: g++.dg/pr52869.C -std=gnu++98 (test for excess errors)
FAIL: g++.dg/pr52869.C -std=gnu++11 (test for excess errors)
You can run just the new test in all dialects using:
GXX_TESTSUITE_STDS=98,11,14,17,2a make check-c++ RUNTESTFLAGS=dg.exp=pr52869.C
The noexcept specifier is only in C++11 and newer I think.
+template< typename T >
+T sine( T const& a, T const& b ) noexcept
+{
+ static_assert( noexcept( T(a / sqrt(a * a + b * b)) ), "throwing expr" );
+ return a / sqrt(a * a + b * b);
+}
+
+int foo() noexcept
+{
+ return 1;
+}
+
I don't understand what this part of the test is testing. It compiles even
without the patch. Let's drop it.
Marek
