On 11/27/2013 04:35 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 11/27/2013 05:22 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Thus something like the below? Passes testing.
Yep. With a comment that we can only get there in checking mode via
build_non_dependent_expr, because any expression that calls or takes
the address of th
On 11/27/2013 05:22 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Thus something like the below? Passes testing.
Yep. With a comment that we can only get there in checking mode via
build_non_dependent_expr, because any expression that calls or takes the
address of the function will have pull a FUNCTION_DECL out
Hi,
On 11/26/2013 08:10 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 11/26/2013 11:43 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
We have got a bunch of testcases, for example constexpr-ex4.C - attached
for your convenience - which trigger the assert !really_overloaded_fn
(t) ... What do you suggest?
Aha. Well, in that case we
On 11/26/2013 11:43 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
We have got a bunch of testcases, for example constexpr-ex4.C - attached
for your convenience - which trigger the assert !really_overloaded_fn
(t) ... What do you suggest?
Aha. Well, in that case we really can't get a constant value, so I'd
assert
Hi,
On 11/26/2013 04:30 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
A BASELINK isn't useful as a constant, either; I was thinking of the
FUNCTION_DECL itself. Perhaps
gcc_checking_assert (!really_overloaded_fn
return get_first_fn
We have got a bunch of testcases, for example constexpr-ex4.C - attached
for your
On 11/26/2013 05:40 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Hi,
On 11/23/2013 11:35 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/20/2013 12:07 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
case COMPONENT_REF:
+ if (is_overloaded_fn (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1)))
+return t;
Hmm, I'd be inclined to strip the COMPONENT_REF in this case t
Hi,
On 11/23/2013 11:35 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 10/20/2013 12:07 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
case COMPONENT_REF:
+ if (is_overloaded_fn (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1)))
+return t;
Hmm, I'd be inclined to strip the COMPONENT_REF in this case to
produce something that's actually usable as
On 10/20/2013 12:07 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
case COMPONENT_REF:
+ if (is_overloaded_fn (TREE_OPERAND (t, 1)))
+ return t;
Hmm, I'd be inclined to strip the COMPONENT_REF in this case to produce
something that's actually usable as a constant. Does that work?
Jason
Hi,
this ICE on valid, [4.7/4.8/4.9 Regression], happens only with
-std=c++11 and is quite simple to analyze: cxx_eval_constant_expression
sees a COMPONENT_REF and forwards to cxx_eval_component_reference, but
the latter, evidently, only handles "fields" not functions (per the
comment) and an
