On 3/15/24 13:48, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 03:39:04PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 3/8/24 12:02, Marek Polacek wrote:
Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?

-- >8 --
Consider

    constexpr int VAL = 1;
    struct foo {
        template <int B>
        void bar(typename std::conditional<B==VAL, int, float>::type arg) { }
    };
    template void foo::bar<1>(int arg);

where we since r11-291 fail to emit the code for the explicit
instantiation.  That's because cp_walk_subtrees/TYPENAME_TYPE now
walks TYPE_CONTEXT ('conditional' here) as well, and in a template
finds the B==VAL template argument.  VAL is constexpr, which implies const,
which in the global scope implies static.  constrain_visibility_for_template
then makes "struct conditional<(B == VAL), int, float>" non-TREE_PUBLIC.
Then symtab_node::needed_p checks TREE_PUBLIC, sees it's 0, and we don't
emit any code.

I thought the fix would be some ODR-esque check to not consider
constexpr variables/fns that are used just for their value.  But
it turned out to be tricky.  For instance, we can't skip
determine_visibility in a template; we can't even skip it for value-dep
expressions.  For example, no-linkage-expr1.C has

    using P = struct {}*;
    template <int N>
    void f(int(*)[((P)0, N)]) {}

where ((P)0, N) is value-dep, but N is not relevant here: we have to
ferret out the anonymous type.  When instantiating, it's already gone.

Hmm, how is that different from the B == VAL case?  In both cases we're
naming an internal entity that gets folded away.

I guess the difference is that B == VAL falls under the special allowance in
https://eel.is/c++draft/basic.def.odr#14.5.1 because it's a constant used as
a prvalue, and therefore is not odr-used under
https://eel.is/c++draft/basic.def.odr#5.2

So I would limit this change to decl_constant_var_p.  Really we should also
be checking that the lvalue-rvalue conversion is applied, but that's more
complicated.

Thanks.  My previous version had it, but it didn't handle

   static constexpr int getval () { return 1; }

   template <int B>
   void baz(typename conditional<B == getval (), int, float>::type arg) { }

I'd say that "getval()" is one of "manifestly constant-evaluated expressions 
that
are not value-dependent", so it should be treated the same as B == VAL.

But it doesn't satisfy the 14.5 rule that corresponding names need to refer to the same entity; since getval names a function, it doesn't get the special exemption from that rule that VAL gets.

So this should not be treated the same as B == VAL.

I don't know if this is important to handle.  Do you want me to poke further or
should we just go with decl_constant_var_p and leave it at that for now?

Just decl_constant_var_p.

Jason

Reply via email to