Hi,
the below fixes an ICE on invalid which didn't occur in 4.6 (because we
didn't produce the notes). The issue is that for this kind of test:
struct A
{
A(int);
};
struct B : A {};
constexpr int foo(B) { return 0; }
add_implicitly_declared_members sets TYPE_HAS_DEFAULT_CONSTRUCTOR (t) =
1 for B, but then, in explain_non_literal_class, the true value doesn't
imply that locate_ctor actually finds the constructor, due to the
nature of A.
Tested x86_64-linux. Ok?
Thanks,
Paolo.
///////////////////////
/cp
2011-11-30 Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com>
PR c++/51327
* class.c (explain_non_literal_class): Check locate_ctor return value.
/testsuite
2011-11-30 Paolo Carlini <paolo.carl...@oracle.com>
PR c++/51327
* g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-ice4.C: New.
Index: testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-ice4.C
===================================================================
--- testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-ice4.C (revision 0)
+++ testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-ice4.C (revision 0)
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+// PR c++/51327
+// { dg-options -std=c++0x }
+
+struct A
+{
+ A(int);
+};
+
+struct B : A {}; // { dg-message "literal|aggregate" }
+
+constexpr int foo(B) { return 0; } // { dg-error "invalid type" }
Index: cp/class.c
===================================================================
--- cp/class.c (revision 181858)
+++ cp/class.c (working copy)
@@ -4859,12 +4859,14 @@ explain_non_literal_class (tree t)
&& !TYPE_HAS_TRIVIAL_DFLT (t)
&& !TYPE_HAS_CONSTEXPR_CTOR (t))
{
+ tree ctor;
inform (0, " %q+T is not an aggregate, does not have a trivial "
"default constructor, and has no constexpr constructor that "
"is not a copy or move constructor", t);
if (TYPE_HAS_DEFAULT_CONSTRUCTOR (t)
- && !type_has_user_provided_default_constructor (t))
- explain_invalid_constexpr_fn (locate_ctor (t));
+ && !type_has_user_provided_default_constructor (t)
+ && (ctor = locate_ctor (t)))
+ explain_invalid_constexpr_fn (ctor);
}
else
{
