Hi!
On the following testcase we ICE in maybe_explain_implicit_delete, because
FUNCTION_FIRST_USER_PARMTYPE (decl) is NULL - there are no user parameters
and ...
>From what I understood, const_p is used only in certain cases like const vs.
non-const copy constructor or assignment operator, if the sfk has no user
parameters, usually parm_type is just the void_type terminating the argument
list and also not really interesting for const_p computation.
So, this patch just arranges to pass false as const_p in this case.
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-linux and i686-linux, ok for trunk?
2018-11-21 Jakub Jelinek <ja...@redhat.com>
PR c++/88122
* method.c (maybe_explain_implicit_delete): If
FUNCTION_FIRST_USER_PARMTYPE (decl) is NULL, set const_p to false
instead of ICEing.
* g++.dg/cpp0x/implicit15.C: New test.
--- gcc/cp/method.c.jj 2018-11-16 10:22:18.668258171 +0100
+++ gcc/cp/method.c 2018-11-21 15:42:08.441785625 +0100
@@ -1821,8 +1821,12 @@ maybe_explain_implicit_delete (tree decl
if (!informed)
{
tree parms = FUNCTION_FIRST_USER_PARMTYPE (decl);
- tree parm_type = TREE_VALUE (parms);
- bool const_p = CP_TYPE_CONST_P (non_reference (parm_type));
+ bool const_p = false;
+ if (parms)
+ {
+ tree parm_type = TREE_VALUE (parms);
+ const_p = CP_TYPE_CONST_P (non_reference (parm_type));
+ }
tree raises = NULL_TREE;
bool deleted_p = false;
tree scope = push_scope (ctype);
--- gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/implicit15.C.jj 2018-11-21 15:59:29.849741499
+0100
+++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/implicit15.C 2018-11-21 15:58:00.912197089
+0100
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+// PR c++/88122
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+
+struct A {
+ A (...); // { dg-message "candidate" }
+ A (); // { dg-message "candidate" }
+};
+struct B : A {
+ using A::A; // { dg-error "is ambiguous" }
+ // { dg-message "is implicitly deleted because the default
definition would be ill-formed" "" { target *-*-* } .-1 }
+} b{3}; // { dg-error "use of deleted function" }
Jakub
