On 2/17/23 14:42, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 04:32:50PM -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2023, Patrick Palka wrote:

On Fri, 17 Feb 2023, Marek Polacek wrote:

On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 03:00:39PM -0500, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2023, Marek Polacek via Gcc-patches wrote:

Here we crash in is_capture_proxy:

   /* Location wrappers should be stripped or otherwise handled by the
      caller before using this predicate.  */
   gcc_checking_assert (!location_wrapper_p (decl));

so fixed as the comment suggests.  We only crash with the redundant
capture:

   int abyPage = [=, abyPage] { ... }

because prune_lambda_captures is only called when there was a default
capture, and with [=] only abyPage won't be in LAMBDA_EXPR_CAPTURE_LIST.

It's weird that we even get this far in var_to_maybe_prune.  Shouldn't
LAMBDA_CAPTURE_EXPLICIT_P be true for abyPage?

Ug, I was seduced by the ostensible obviousness and failed to notice
that check.  In that light, the correct fix ought to be this.  Thanks!

Bootstrap/regtest running on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk if it
passes?

-- >8 --
Here we crash in is_capture_proxy:

   /* Location wrappers should be stripped or otherwise handled by the
      caller before using this predicate.  */
   gcc_checking_assert (!location_wrapper_p (decl));

We only crash with the redundant capture:

   int abyPage = [=, abyPage] { ... }

because prune_lambda_captures is only called when there was a default
capture, and with [=] only abyPage won't be in LAMBDA_EXPR_CAPTURE_LIST.

The problem is that LAMBDA_CAPTURE_EXPLICIT_P wasn't propagated
correctly and so var_to_maybe_prune proceeded where it shouldn't.

        PR c++/108829

gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

        * pt.cc (tsubst_lambda_expr): Propagate LAMBDA_CAPTURE_EXPLICIT_P.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

        * g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829.C: New test.
---
  gcc/cp/pt.cc                                      |  4 ++++
  gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829.C | 11 +++++++++++
  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+)
  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829.C

diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.cc b/gcc/cp/pt.cc
index b1ac7d4beb4..f747ce877b5 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/pt.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/pt.cc
@@ -19992,6 +19992,10 @@ tsubst_lambda_expr (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t 
complain, tree in_decl)
          if (id_equal (DECL_NAME (field), "__this"))
            LAMBDA_EXPR_THIS_CAPTURE (r) = field;
        }
+
+      if (LAMBDA_EXPR_CAPTURE_LIST (r))
+       LAMBDA_CAPTURE_EXPLICIT_P (LAMBDA_EXPR_CAPTURE_LIST (r))
+         = LAMBDA_CAPTURE_EXPLICIT_P (LAMBDA_EXPR_CAPTURE_LIST (t));

I'm not sure how the flag works for pack captures but it looks like
this would only propagate the flag to the last expanded capture if
the capture was originally a pack.

Testcase:

   template<int, class... Ts>
   void f(Ts... ts) {
     constexpr int IDX_PAGE_SIZE = 4096;
     int abyPage = [=, ts...] { return IDX_PAGE_SIZE; }();
   }
   void h() {
     f<1>(0, 1);
   }

Thanks a lot for the testacase.  Revised patch below.  Look OK?

Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?

OK.

-- >8 --
Here we crash in is_capture_proxy:

   /* Location wrappers should be stripped or otherwise handled by the
      caller before using this predicate.  */
   gcc_checking_assert (!location_wrapper_p (decl));

We only crash with the redundant capture:

   int abyPage = [=, abyPage] { ... }

because prune_lambda_captures is only called when there was a default
capture, and with [=] only abyPage won't be in LAMBDA_EXPR_CAPTURE_LIST.

The problem is that LAMBDA_CAPTURE_EXPLICIT_P wasn't propagated
correctly and so var_to_maybe_prune proceeded where it shouldn't.

        PR c++/108829

gcc/cp/ChangeLog:

        * pt.cc (prepend_one_capture): Set LAMBDA_CAPTURE_EXPLICIT_P.
        (tsubst_lambda_expr): Pass LAMBDA_CAPTURE_EXPLICIT_P to
        prepend_one_capture.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

        * g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829-2.C: New test.
        * g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829.C: New test.

Co-Authored by: Patrick Palka <ppa...@redhat.com>
---
  gcc/cp/pt.cc                                        |  9 ++++++---
  gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829-2.C | 11 +++++++++++
  gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829.C   | 11 +++++++++++
  3 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829-2.C
  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829.C

diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.cc b/gcc/cp/pt.cc
index b1ac7d4beb4..1a071e95004 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/pt.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/pt.cc
@@ -19870,10 +19870,11 @@ tsubst_non_call_postfix_expression (tree t, tree args,
/* Subroutine of tsubst_lambda_expr: add the FIELD/INIT capture pair to the
     LAMBDA_EXPR_CAPTURE_LIST passed in LIST.  Do deduction for a previously
-   dependent init-capture.  */
+   dependent init-capture.  EXPLICIT_P is true if the original list had
+   explicit captures.  */
static void
-prepend_one_capture (tree field, tree init, tree &list,
+prepend_one_capture (tree field, tree init, tree &list, bool explicit_p,
                     tsubst_flags_t complain)
  {
    if (tree auto_node = type_uses_auto (TREE_TYPE (field)))
@@ -19893,6 +19894,7 @@ prepend_one_capture (tree field, tree init, tree &list,
        cp_apply_type_quals_to_decl (cp_type_quals (type), field);
      }
    list = tree_cons (field, init, list);
+  LAMBDA_CAPTURE_EXPLICIT_P (list) = explicit_p;
  }
/* T is a LAMBDA_EXPR. Generate a new LAMBDA_EXPR for the current
@@ -19982,12 +19984,13 @@ tsubst_lambda_expr (tree t, tree args, tsubst_flags_t 
complain, tree in_decl)
            prepend_one_capture (TREE_VEC_ELT (field, i),
                                 TREE_VEC_ELT (init, i),
                                 LAMBDA_EXPR_CAPTURE_LIST (r),
+                                LAMBDA_CAPTURE_EXPLICIT_P (cap),
                                 complain);
        }
        else
        {
          prepend_one_capture (field, init, LAMBDA_EXPR_CAPTURE_LIST (r),
-                              complain);
+                              LAMBDA_CAPTURE_EXPLICIT_P (cap), complain);
if (id_equal (DECL_NAME (field), "__this"))
            LAMBDA_EXPR_THIS_CAPTURE (r) = field;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829-2.C 
b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829-2.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..4e24470514d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829-2.C
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+// PR c++/108829
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+
+template<int, class... Ts>
+void f(Ts... ts) {
+  constexpr int IDX_PAGE_SIZE = 4096;
+  int abyPage = [=, ts...] { return IDX_PAGE_SIZE; }();  // { dg-error 
"redundant" }
+}
+void h() {
+  f<1>(0, 1);
+}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829.C 
b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..e621a0d14d0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/lambda/lambda-108829.C
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+// PR c++/108829
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+
+template <int>
+void f(void) {
+  constexpr int IDX_PAGE_SIZE = 4096;
+  int abyPage = [=, abyPage] { return IDX_PAGE_SIZE; }(); // { dg-error 
"redundant" }
+}
+void h() {
+  f<1>();
+}

base-commit: 5fea1be820508e1fbc610d1a54b61c1add33c36f

Reply via email to