On 6/10/24 11:13, Marek Polacek wrote:
On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 10:22:11AM -0400, Patrick Palka wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jun 2024, Marek Polacek wrote:
@@ -3940,9 +3936,6 @@ find_parameter_packs_r (tree *tp, int *walk_subtrees,
void* data)
parameter pack (14.6.3), or the type-specifier-seq of a type-id that
is a pack expansion, the invented template parameter is a template
parameter pack. */
This comment should be removed too I think.
Removed in my local tree.
- if (flag_concepts_ts && ppd->type_pack_expansion_p && is_auto (t)
(BTW this seems to be the only actual user of type_pack_expansion_p so we
can in turn remove that field too.)
Oh neat. I can do that as a follow-up, unless y'all think it should be
part of this patch. Thanks,
It probably makes sense for it to be part of this patch.
One exception I'm aware of is template-introductions, as in:
template<typename T>
concept C = true;
C{T} void foo ();
where we warn by default, but accept the code, and my patch does not
remove the support just yet.
I think let's go ahead and remove it as well.
+// ??? This used to be a link test with Concepts TS, but now we
+// get:
+// undefined reference to `_Z2f5ITk1C1XEvT_Q1DIS1_E'
+// undefined reference to `_Z2f6ITk1C1XEvT_Q1DIS1_E'
+// so it's a compile test only.
That means the test is failing, and we shouldn't in general change tests
to stop testing the thing that fails; better to xfail.
In this case, however, C++20 doesn't establish the equivalence that it's
testing; that's another thing that wasn't adopted from the Concepts TS.
Note that this area is in question currently; see CWG2802. But I think
the equivalence is unlikely to return.
So let's move main() to the bottom of the test and test for the
ambiguity errors that we get because they aren't equivalent.
--- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/concepts/pr67595.C
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,14 +0,0 @@
-// { dg-do compile { target c++17_only } }
-// { dg-options "-fconcepts-ts" }
-
-template <class X> concept bool allocatable = requires{{new X}->X *; };
-template <class X> concept bool semiregular = allocatable<X>;
-template <class X> concept bool readable = requires{requires semiregular<X>;};
-template <class> int weak_input_iterator = requires{{0}->readable;};
-template <class X> bool input_iterator{weak_input_iterator<X>}; // { dg-prune-output
"narrowing conversion" }
-template <class X> bool forward_iterator{input_iterator<X>};
-template <class X> bool bidirectional_iterator{forward_iterator<X>};
-template <class X>
-concept bool random_access_iterator{bidirectional_iterator<X>}; // { dg-error
"constant" }
-void fn1(random_access_iterator);
-int main() { fn1(0); } // { dg-error "" }
Why remove this test? The main issue I see is that {new X}->X* needs to
change to {new X}->convertible_to<X*> (or same_as)
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-requires5.C
@@ -1,7 +1,5 @@
// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
-// { dg-additional-options "-fconcepts-ts -fconcepts-diagnostics-depth=2" }
-
-// Test conversion requirements (not in C++20)
This one could get the same adjustment instead of adding dg-errors. Or
perhaps the error could suggest that adjustment, and this testcase could
check that?
Jason
