enforce_access currently inspects processing_template_decl to determine
whether to defer the given access check until instantiation time. But
using this flag is unreliable because it gets cleared during e.g.
non-dependent initializer folding, and can lead to premature access
check failures as in the below testcase. It seems better to inspect
current_template_parms instead.
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK
for trunk?
PR c++/109480
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* semantics.cc (enforce_access): Check current_template_parms
instead of processing_template_decl when determining whether
to defer the access check.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/template/non-dependent25a.C: New test.
---
gcc/cp/semantics.cc | 2 +-
.../g++.dg/template/non-dependent25a.C | 17 +++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/non-dependent25a.C
diff --git a/gcc/cp/semantics.cc b/gcc/cp/semantics.cc
index 9ba316ab3be..474da71bff6 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/semantics.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/semantics.cc
@@ -346,7 +346,7 @@ enforce_access (tree basetype_path, tree decl, tree
diag_decl,
}
tree cs = current_scope ();
- if (processing_template_decl
+ if (current_template_parms
&& (CLASS_TYPE_P (cs) || TREE_CODE (cs) == FUNCTION_DECL))
if (tree template_info = get_template_info (cs))
{
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/non-dependent25a.C
b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/non-dependent25a.C
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..902e537ec09
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/non-dependent25a.C
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+// PR c++/109480
+// A version of non-dependent25.C where b's initializer is a constant
+// expression.
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+
+template<class T>
+struct A {
+ void f() {
+ constexpr A<int> a;
+ const bool b = a.g(); // { dg-bogus "private" }
+ }
+
+private:
+ constexpr bool g() const { return true; }
+};
+
+template struct A<int>;
--
2.40.1.459.g48d89b51b3
