Hahnfeld added a comment.

FWIW this also causes a `static_assert` failure while building ROOT 
<https://github.com/root-project/root/>:
  In file included from 
/home/jhahnfel/ROOT/src/tmva/tmva/src/DNN/Architectures/Cpu/CpuBuffer.cxx:17:
  In file included from 
/opt/rh/gcc-toolset-11/root/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/11/../../../../include/c++/11/memory:77:
  In file included from 
/opt/rh/gcc-toolset-11/root/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/11/../../../../include/c++/11/bits/shared_ptr.h:53:
  
/opt/rh/gcc-toolset-11/root/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/11/../../../../include/c++/11/bits/shared_ptr_base.h:1110:4:
 error: static assertion failed due to requirement 
'__is_invocable<TMVA::DNN::TCpuBuffer<double>::TDestructor &, double 
**&>::value': deleter expression d(p) is well-formed
            static_assert(__is_invocable<_Deleter&, _Yp*&>::value,
            ^             ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  
/opt/rh/gcc-toolset-11/root/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/11/../../../../include/c++/11/bits/shared_ptr.h:178:11:
 note: in instantiation of function template specialization 
'std::__shared_ptr<double *, __gnu_cxx::_S_atomic>::__shared_ptr<double *, 
TMVA::DNN::TCpuBuffer<double>::TDestructor, void>' requested here
          : __shared_ptr<_Tp>(__p, std::move(__d)) { }
            ^
  
/home/jhahnfel/ROOT/src/tmva/tmva/src/DNN/Architectures/Cpu/CpuBuffer.cxx:42:14:
 note: in instantiation of function template specialization 
'std::shared_ptr<double *>::shared_ptr<double *, 
TMVA::DNN::TCpuBuffer<double>::TDestructor, void>' requested here
     fBuffer = std::shared_ptr<AReal *>(pointer, fDestructor);
               ^

After the revert, at least this issue is gone when building with current `main`.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D129973/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D129973

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to