Jason Merrill writes:
> But yes, the patch is OK after fixing the comment.
Thanks. Here is what I am bootstrapping.
gcc/cp/
PR c++/51476
* pt.c (convert_nontype_argument): Don't call maybe_constant_value
for PTRMEM_CST nodes.
gcc/testsuite/
PR c++/51476
On 12/13/2011 02:03 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
On 12/13/2011 12:43 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
+ if (TREE_CODE (expr) == PTRMEM_CST)
+ /* We don't need to test if a PTRMEM_CST is a constant value
+ because maybe_constant_value might crash and because
+ [temp.arg.nontype]/1 says it's not allowed as a
On 12/13/2011 12:43 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
+ if (TREE_CODE (expr) == PTRMEM_CST)
+ /* We don't need to test if a PTRMEM_CST is a constant value
+ because maybe_constant_value might crash and because
+ [temp.arg.nontype]/1 says it's not allowed as a template
+
Jason Merrill writes:
> Let's check for PTRMEM_CST separately, before any of the other tests.
Like this? I still need to run it through bootstrap ...
gcc/cp/
PR c++/51476
* pt.c (convert_nontype_argument): Don't call maybe_constant_value
for PTRMEM_CST nodes.
gcc/test
On 12/13/2011 10:50 AM, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
- if (INTEGRAL_OR_ENUMERATION_TYPE_P (type))
+ if (INTEGRAL_OR_ENUMERATION_TYPE_P (type)
+ && TREE_CODE (expr) != PTRMEM_CST)
expr = maybe_constant_value (expr);
else if (TYPE_PTR_P (type)
|| (TYPE_PTR_T
Hello,
In the example of the patch, we crash because convert_nontype_argument
calls maybe_constant_value with the PTRMEM_CST for &B::i (in cxx0x
mode) which ends up trying to poke at the offset of i, but struct B is
not yet laid out.
My understanding is that using a pointer to non-static member a
