On 11 Sep 2024, at 20:57, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 9/11/24 7:26 AM, Simon Martin wrote:
>> We currently ICE upon the following code while building the "[...] is
>> private within this context" error message
>>
>> === cut here ===
>> class A { enum Enum{}; };
>> template<typename E, template<typename> class Alloc>
>> class B : private Alloc<E>, private A {};
>> template<typename E, template<typename> class Alloc>
>> int B<E, Alloc>::foo (Enum m) { return 42; }
>> === cut here ===
>>
>> The problem is that since r11-6880, after detecting that Enum cannot
>> be
>> accessed in B, enforce_access will access the TYPE_BINFO of all the
>> bases of B, which ICEs for any that is a
>> BOUND_TEMPLATE_TEMPLATE_PARM.
>> This patch simply skips such bases.
>>
>> Successfully tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
>>
>> PR c++/116323
>>
>> gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
>>
>> * search.cc (get_parent_with_private_access): Only call
>> access_in_type
>> for RECORD_OR_UNION_TYPE_P base BINFOs.
>>
>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>
>> * g++.dg/template/access43.C: New test.
>>
>> ---
>> gcc/cp/search.cc | 4 +++-
>> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/access43.C | 11 +++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/access43.C
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/cp/search.cc b/gcc/cp/search.cc
>> index 60c30ecb881..a810cf70d6a 100644
>> --- a/gcc/cp/search.cc
>> +++ b/gcc/cp/search.cc
>> @@ -163,9 +163,11 @@ get_parent_with_private_access (tree decl, tree
>> binfo)
>> /* Iterate through immediate parent classes. */
>> for (int i = 0; BINFO_BASE_ITERATE (binfo, i, base_binfo); i++)
>> {
>> + tree base_binfo_type = BINFO_TYPE (base_binfo);
>> /* This parent had private access. Therefore that's why
>> BINFO can't
>> access DECL. */
>> - if (access_in_type (BINFO_TYPE (base_binfo), decl) ==
>> ak_private)
>> + if (RECORD_OR_UNION_TYPE_P (base_binfo_type)
>
> You might add to the comment to explain that in a template the base
> list can also contain WILDCARD_TYPE_P types. OK either way.
Thanks Jason. Pushed with the suggested extra comment as r15-3598.
Simon
