c++: constrained partial spec forward decl [PR96363]
Commit Message
Here during cp_parser_single_declaration for #2, we were calling
associate_classtype_constraints for TPL<T> (the primary template type)
before maybe_process_partial_specialization could get a chance to
notice that we're in fact declaring a distinct constrained partial
spec and not redeclaring the primary template. This caused us to
emit a bogus error about differing constraints b/t the primary template
the current constraints at #2. This patch fixes this by moving the
call to associate_classtype_constraints after the call to shadow_tag
(which calls maybe_process_partial_specialization) and adjusting
shadow_tag to use the return value of m_p_p_s.
Moreover, if we later try to define a constrained partial specialization
that's been declared earlier (as in the third testcase), then
maybe_new_partial_specialization correctly notices that it's a
redeclaration and returns NULL_TREE. But we need to also update TYPE to
point to the constrained class type in this case (it'll otherwise
continue to point to the primary template type, eventually leading to a
bogus error).
Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, also tested against
cmcstl and range-v3, does this look OK for trunk? Since it should only
affect concepts code, I wonder about backporting this for 12.2?
PR c++/96363
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* decl.cc (shadow_tag): Use the return value of
maybe_process_partial_specialization.
* parser.cc (cp_parser_single_declaration): Call shadow_tag
before associate_classtype_constraints.
* pt.cc (maybe_new_partial_specialization): Change return type
to bool. Take 'type' argument by mutable reference. Set 'type'
to point to the correct constrained specialization when
appropriate.
(maybe_process_partial_specialization): Adjust accordingly.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C: New test.
* g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C: New test.
---
gcc/cp/decl.cc | 3 +-
gcc/cp/parser.cc | 12 +++---
gcc/cp/pt.cc | 38 ++++++++++---------
.../g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C | 10 +++++
.../g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12a.C | 14 +++++++
.../g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C | 16 ++++++++
6 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12a.C
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C
Comments
On 5/25/22 13:24, Patrick Palka wrote:
> Here during cp_parser_single_declaration for #2, we were calling
> associate_classtype_constraints for TPL<T> (the primary template type)
> before maybe_process_partial_specialization could get a chance to
> notice that we're in fact declaring a distinct constrained partial
> spec and not redeclaring the primary template. This caused us to
> emit a bogus error about differing constraints b/t the primary template
> the current constraints at #2. This patch fixes this by moving the
> call to associate_classtype_constraints after the call to shadow_tag
> (which calls maybe_process_partial_specialization) and adjusting
> shadow_tag to use the return value of m_p_p_s.
>
> Moreover, if we later try to define a constrained partial specialization
> that's been declared earlier (as in the third testcase), then
> maybe_new_partial_specialization correctly notices that it's a
> redeclaration and returns NULL_TREE. But we need to also update TYPE to
> point to the constrained class type in this case (it'll otherwise
> continue to point to the primary template type, eventually leading to a
> bogus error).
>
> Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, also tested against
> cmcstl and range-v3, does this look OK for trunk?
OK.
> Since it should only
> affect concepts code, I wonder about backporting this for 12.2?
OK.
> PR c++/96363
>
> gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
>
> * decl.cc (shadow_tag): Use the return value of
> maybe_process_partial_specialization.
> * parser.cc (cp_parser_single_declaration): Call shadow_tag
> before associate_classtype_constraints.
> * pt.cc (maybe_new_partial_specialization): Change return type
> to bool. Take 'type' argument by mutable reference. Set 'type'
> to point to the correct constrained specialization when
> appropriate.
> (maybe_process_partial_specialization): Adjust accordingly.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C: New test.
> * g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C: New test.
> ---
> gcc/cp/decl.cc | 3 +-
> gcc/cp/parser.cc | 12 +++---
> gcc/cp/pt.cc | 38 ++++++++++---------
> .../g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C | 10 +++++
> .../g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12a.C | 14 +++++++
> .../g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C | 16 ++++++++
> 6 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C
> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12a.C
> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C
>
> diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.cc b/gcc/cp/decl.cc
> index 381259cb9cf..c7caa12f061 100644
> --- a/gcc/cp/decl.cc
> +++ b/gcc/cp/decl.cc
> @@ -5464,7 +5464,8 @@ shadow_tag (cp_decl_specifier_seq *declspecs)
> if (!t)
> return NULL_TREE;
>
> - if (maybe_process_partial_specialization (t) == error_mark_node)
> + t = maybe_process_partial_specialization (t);
> + if (t == error_mark_node)
> return NULL_TREE;
>
> /* This is where the variables in an anonymous union are
> diff --git a/gcc/cp/parser.cc b/gcc/cp/parser.cc
> index 868b8610d60..d9e78e1f4cc 100644
> --- a/gcc/cp/parser.cc
> +++ b/gcc/cp/parser.cc
> @@ -31811,12 +31811,6 @@ cp_parser_single_declaration (cp_parser* parser,
> if (cp_parser_declares_only_class_p (parser)
> || (declares_class_or_enum & 2))
> {
> - /* If this is a declaration, but not a definition, associate
> - any constraints with the type declaration. Constraints
> - are associated with definitions in cp_parser_class_specifier. */
> - if (declares_class_or_enum == 1)
> - associate_classtype_constraints (decl_specifiers.type);
> -
> decl = shadow_tag (&decl_specifiers);
>
> /* In this case:
> @@ -31838,6 +31832,12 @@ cp_parser_single_declaration (cp_parser* parser,
> else
> decl = error_mark_node;
>
> + /* If this is a declaration, but not a definition, associate
> + any constraints with the type declaration. Constraints
> + are associated with definitions in cp_parser_class_specifier. */
> + if (declares_class_or_enum == 1)
> + associate_classtype_constraints (TREE_TYPE (decl));
> +
> /* Perform access checks for template parameters. */
> cp_parser_perform_template_parameter_access_checks (checks);
>
> diff --git a/gcc/cp/pt.cc b/gcc/cp/pt.cc
> index b45a29926d2..7de9b11bd12 100644
> --- a/gcc/cp/pt.cc
> +++ b/gcc/cp/pt.cc
> @@ -874,12 +874,12 @@ check_explicit_instantiation_namespace (tree spec)
> spec, current_namespace, ns);
> }
>
> -/* Returns the type of a template specialization only if that
> - specialization needs to be defined. Otherwise (e.g., if the type has
> - already been defined), the function returns NULL_TREE. */
> +/* Returns true if TYPE is a new partial specialization that needs to be
> + set up. This may also modify TYPE to point to the correct (new or
> + existing) constrained partial specialization in any case. */
>
> -static tree
> -maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
> +static bool
> +maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree& type)
> {
> /* An implicit instantiation of an incomplete type implies
> the definition of a new class template.
> @@ -893,7 +893,7 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
> Here, S<T*> is an implicit instantiation of S whose type
> is incomplete. */
> if (CLASSTYPE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (type) && !COMPLETE_TYPE_P (type))
> - return type;
> + return true;
>
> /* It can also be the case that TYPE is a completed specialization.
> Continuing the previous example, suppose we also declare:
> @@ -919,11 +919,11 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
> /* If there are no template parameters, this cannot be a new
> partial template specialization? */
> if (!current_template_parms)
> - return NULL_TREE;
> + return false;
>
> /* The injected-class-name is not a new partial specialization. */
> if (DECL_SELF_REFERENCE_P (TYPE_NAME (type)))
> - return NULL_TREE;
> + return false;
>
> /* If the constraints are not the same as those of the primary
> then, we can probably create a new specialization. */
> @@ -933,7 +933,7 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
> {
> tree main_constr = get_constraints (tmpl);
> if (equivalent_constraints (type_constr, main_constr))
> - return NULL_TREE;
> + return false;
> }
>
> /* Also, if there's a pre-existing specialization with matching
> @@ -946,7 +946,10 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
> tree spec_constr = get_constraints (spec_tmpl);
> if (comp_template_args (args, spec_args)
> && equivalent_constraints (type_constr, spec_constr))
> - return NULL_TREE;
> + {
> + type = TREE_TYPE (spec_tmpl);
> + return false;
> + }
> specs = TREE_CHAIN (specs);
> }
>
> @@ -971,10 +974,11 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
> set_instantiating_module (d);
> DECL_MODULE_EXPORT_P (d) = DECL_MODULE_EXPORT_P (tmpl);
>
> - return t;
> + type = t;
> + return true;
> }
>
> - return NULL_TREE;
> + return false;
> }
>
> /* The TYPE is being declared. If it is a template type, that means it
> @@ -1030,16 +1034,16 @@ maybe_process_partial_specialization (tree type)
>
> Make sure that `C<int>' and `C<T*>' are implicit instantiations. */
>
> - if (tree t = maybe_new_partial_specialization (type))
> + if (maybe_new_partial_specialization (type))
> {
> - if (!check_specialization_namespace (CLASSTYPE_TI_TEMPLATE (t))
> + if (!check_specialization_namespace (CLASSTYPE_TI_TEMPLATE (type))
> && !at_namespace_scope_p ())
> return error_mark_node;
> - SET_CLASSTYPE_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (t);
> - DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (TYPE_MAIN_DECL (t)) = input_location;
> + SET_CLASSTYPE_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (type);
> + DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (TYPE_MAIN_DECL (type)) = input_location;
> if (processing_template_decl)
> {
> - tree decl = push_template_decl (TYPE_MAIN_DECL (t));
> + tree decl = push_template_decl (TYPE_MAIN_DECL (type));
> if (decl == error_mark_node)
> return error_mark_node;
> return TREE_TYPE (decl);
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..7868092af2b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
> +// PR c++/96363
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
> +
> +template<class T> class TPL;
> +
> +template<class T> requires true class TPL<T>; // #1
> +template<class T> requires false class TPL<T>; // #2 error here
> +
> +template<class T> requires true class TPL<T*>; // #1
> +template<class T> requires false class TPL<T*>; // #2 error here
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12a.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12a.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..18e67f70944
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec12a.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
> +// PR c++/96363
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
> +// A version of concepts-partial-spec12.C where the primary template is
> +// constrained.
> +
> +template<class T> concept C = true;
> +
> +template<C T> class TPL;
> +
> +template<C T> requires true class TPL<T>; // #1
> +template<C T> requires false class TPL<T>; // #2 error here
> +
> +template<C T> requires true class TPL<T*>; // #1
> +template<C T> requires false class TPL<T*>; // #2 error here
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000..78f6906b1ab
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp2a/concepts-partial-spec13.C
> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> +// PR c++/99501
> +// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
> +
> +template<auto> struct X{};
> +
> +template<auto V> requires requires{V.a;} struct X<V>;
> +template<auto V> requires requires{V.b;} struct X<V>;
> +
> +template<auto V> requires requires{V.a;} struct X<V> { static const bool v = false; };
> +template<auto V> requires requires{V.b;} struct X<V> { static const bool v = true; };
> +
> +struct A {int a; };
> +static_assert(!X<A{}>::v);
> +
> +struct B { int b; };
> +static_assert(X<B{}>::v);
@@ -5464,7 +5464,8 @@ shadow_tag (cp_decl_specifier_seq *declspecs)
if (!t)
return NULL_TREE;
- if (maybe_process_partial_specialization (t) == error_mark_node)
+ t = maybe_process_partial_specialization (t);
+ if (t == error_mark_node)
return NULL_TREE;
/* This is where the variables in an anonymous union are
@@ -31811,12 +31811,6 @@ cp_parser_single_declaration (cp_parser* parser,
if (cp_parser_declares_only_class_p (parser)
|| (declares_class_or_enum & 2))
{
- /* If this is a declaration, but not a definition, associate
- any constraints with the type declaration. Constraints
- are associated with definitions in cp_parser_class_specifier. */
- if (declares_class_or_enum == 1)
- associate_classtype_constraints (decl_specifiers.type);
-
decl = shadow_tag (&decl_specifiers);
/* In this case:
@@ -31838,6 +31832,12 @@ cp_parser_single_declaration (cp_parser* parser,
else
decl = error_mark_node;
+ /* If this is a declaration, but not a definition, associate
+ any constraints with the type declaration. Constraints
+ are associated with definitions in cp_parser_class_specifier. */
+ if (declares_class_or_enum == 1)
+ associate_classtype_constraints (TREE_TYPE (decl));
+
/* Perform access checks for template parameters. */
cp_parser_perform_template_parameter_access_checks (checks);
@@ -874,12 +874,12 @@ check_explicit_instantiation_namespace (tree spec)
spec, current_namespace, ns);
}
-/* Returns the type of a template specialization only if that
- specialization needs to be defined. Otherwise (e.g., if the type has
- already been defined), the function returns NULL_TREE. */
+/* Returns true if TYPE is a new partial specialization that needs to be
+ set up. This may also modify TYPE to point to the correct (new or
+ existing) constrained partial specialization in any case. */
-static tree
-maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
+static bool
+maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree& type)
{
/* An implicit instantiation of an incomplete type implies
the definition of a new class template.
@@ -893,7 +893,7 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
Here, S<T*> is an implicit instantiation of S whose type
is incomplete. */
if (CLASSTYPE_IMPLICIT_INSTANTIATION (type) && !COMPLETE_TYPE_P (type))
- return type;
+ return true;
/* It can also be the case that TYPE is a completed specialization.
Continuing the previous example, suppose we also declare:
@@ -919,11 +919,11 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
/* If there are no template parameters, this cannot be a new
partial template specialization? */
if (!current_template_parms)
- return NULL_TREE;
+ return false;
/* The injected-class-name is not a new partial specialization. */
if (DECL_SELF_REFERENCE_P (TYPE_NAME (type)))
- return NULL_TREE;
+ return false;
/* If the constraints are not the same as those of the primary
then, we can probably create a new specialization. */
@@ -933,7 +933,7 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
{
tree main_constr = get_constraints (tmpl);
if (equivalent_constraints (type_constr, main_constr))
- return NULL_TREE;
+ return false;
}
/* Also, if there's a pre-existing specialization with matching
@@ -946,7 +946,10 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
tree spec_constr = get_constraints (spec_tmpl);
if (comp_template_args (args, spec_args)
&& equivalent_constraints (type_constr, spec_constr))
- return NULL_TREE;
+ {
+ type = TREE_TYPE (spec_tmpl);
+ return false;
+ }
specs = TREE_CHAIN (specs);
}
@@ -971,10 +974,11 @@ maybe_new_partial_specialization (tree type)
set_instantiating_module (d);
DECL_MODULE_EXPORT_P (d) = DECL_MODULE_EXPORT_P (tmpl);
- return t;
+ type = t;
+ return true;
}
- return NULL_TREE;
+ return false;
}
/* The TYPE is being declared. If it is a template type, that means it
@@ -1030,16 +1034,16 @@ maybe_process_partial_specialization (tree type)
Make sure that `C<int>' and `C<T*>' are implicit instantiations. */
- if (tree t = maybe_new_partial_specialization (type))
+ if (maybe_new_partial_specialization (type))
{
- if (!check_specialization_namespace (CLASSTYPE_TI_TEMPLATE (t))
+ if (!check_specialization_namespace (CLASSTYPE_TI_TEMPLATE (type))
&& !at_namespace_scope_p ())
return error_mark_node;
- SET_CLASSTYPE_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (t);
- DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (TYPE_MAIN_DECL (t)) = input_location;
+ SET_CLASSTYPE_TEMPLATE_SPECIALIZATION (type);
+ DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (TYPE_MAIN_DECL (type)) = input_location;
if (processing_template_decl)
{
- tree decl = push_template_decl (TYPE_MAIN_DECL (t));
+ tree decl = push_template_decl (TYPE_MAIN_DECL (type));
if (decl == error_mark_node)
return error_mark_node;
return TREE_TYPE (decl);
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+// PR c++/96363
+// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
+
+template<class T> class TPL;
+
+template<class T> requires true class TPL<T>; // #1
+template<class T> requires false class TPL<T>; // #2 error here
+
+template<class T> requires true class TPL<T*>; // #1
+template<class T> requires false class TPL<T*>; // #2 error here
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+// PR c++/96363
+// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
+// A version of concepts-partial-spec12.C where the primary template is
+// constrained.
+
+template<class T> concept C = true;
+
+template<C T> class TPL;
+
+template<C T> requires true class TPL<T>; // #1
+template<C T> requires false class TPL<T>; // #2 error here
+
+template<C T> requires true class TPL<T*>; // #1
+template<C T> requires false class TPL<T*>; // #2 error here
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+// PR c++/99501
+// { dg-do compile { target c++20 } }
+
+template<auto> struct X{};
+
+template<auto V> requires requires{V.a;} struct X<V>;
+template<auto V> requires requires{V.b;} struct X<V>;
+
+template<auto V> requires requires{V.a;} struct X<V> { static const bool v = false; };
+template<auto V> requires requires{V.b;} struct X<V> { static const bool v = true; };
+
+struct A {int a; };
+static_assert(!X<A{}>::v);
+
+struct B { int b; };
+static_assert(X<B{}>::v);