Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK for trunk/backports?
-- >8 -- This is just the member function pointer version of PR c++/105848, wherein our non-dependent call pruning may cause us to not mark an otherwise unused function pointer template argument as used. PR c++/119233 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * pt.cc (mark_template_arguments_used): Also handle member function pointers. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/template/fn-ptr5.C: New test. --- gcc/cp/pt.cc | 6 ++++++ gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/fn-ptr5.C | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/fn-ptr5.C diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.cc b/gcc/cp/pt.cc index 8aaae446868..50eda189c43 100644 --- a/gcc/cp/pt.cc +++ b/gcc/cp/pt.cc @@ -22491,6 +22491,12 @@ mark_template_arguments_used (tree tmpl, tree args) gcc_checking_assert (ok || seen_error ()); } } + /* A member function pointer. */ + else if (TREE_CODE (arg) == PTRMEM_CST) + { + bool ok = mark_used (PTRMEM_CST_MEMBER (arg), tf_none); + gcc_checking_assert (ok || seen_error ()); + } /* A class NTTP argument. */ else if (VAR_P (arg) && DECL_NTTP_OBJECT_P (arg)) diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/fn-ptr5.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/fn-ptr5.C new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..db3113109ef --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/template/fn-ptr5.C @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ +// PR c++/119233 +// A version of fn-ptr3a.C using member instead of non-member function +// pointers. + +struct B { + template<class T> + void f(T) { T::fail; } // { dg-error "fail" } +}; + +template<void (B::*P)(int)> +struct A { + // P not called +}; + +template<void (B::*P)(char)> +void wrap() { + // P not called +} + +template<int> +void g() { + A<&B::f> a; // { dg-message "required from" } + wrap<&B::f>(); // { dg-message "required from" } +} + +int main() { + g<0>(); +} -- 2.49.0.rc1.37.ge969bc8759