[C++,PR65882] Check tf_warning flag in build_new_op_1

On 06/24/2015 06:52 PM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> Hi Mikhail,
> 
> In the gcc-5-branch, I can see that your new inhibit-warn-2.C test
> fails (targets ARM and AArch64).
> 
> I can see this error message in g++.log:
> /aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:
> In function 'void fn1()':
> /aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:29:3:
> error: 'typename A<(F<typename C< <template-parameter-1-1>
>> ::type>::value || B:: value)>::type D::operator=(Expr) [with Expr =
> int; typename A<(F<typename C< <template-parameter-1-1>
>> ::type>::value || B:: value)>::type = int]' is private
> /aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:35:7:
> error: within this context
> 
> Christophe.
> 
Oops. Sorry for that, it seems that I messed up with my testing box and
the backport did not actually get regtested :(.

The problem is caused by difference in wording of diagnostics. GCC 6
gives an error on line 35 and a note on line 29:

$ ./cc1plus ~/gcc/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C
 void fn1()
/home/miyuki/gcc/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:35:7:
error: 'typename A<(F<typename C< <template-parameter-1-1>
>::type>::value || B:: value)>::type D::operator=(Expr) [with Expr =
int; typename A<(F<typename C< <template-parameter-1-1> >::type>::value
|| B:: value)>::type = int]' is private within this context
   opt = 0;
/home/miyuki/gcc/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:29:3:
note: declared private here
   operator=(Expr);

GCC 5 gives two errors:

/home/miyuki/gcc/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:29:3:
error: 'typename A<(F<typename C< <template-parameter-1-1>
>::type>::value || B:: value)>::type D::operator=(Expr) [with Expr =
int; typename A<(F<typename C< <template-parameter-1-1> >::type>::value
|| B:: value)>::type = int]' is private
   operator=(Expr);
/home/miyuki/gcc/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:35:7:
error: within this context
   opt = 0;

It can probably be fixed like this:


But I am not sure, what should I do in this case. Maybe it is better to
remove the failing testcase from GCC 5 branch (provided that
inhibit-warn-1.C tests a fix for the same bug and does not fail)?

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 09:28:34PM +0100, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
> On 06/24/2015 06:52 PM, Christophe Lyon wrote:
> > Hi Mikhail,
> > 
> > In the gcc-5-branch, I can see that your new inhibit-warn-2.C test
> > fails (targets ARM and AArch64).
> > 
> > I can see this error message in g++.log:
> > /aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:
> > In function 'void fn1()':
> > /aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:29:3:
> > error: 'typename A<(F<typename C< <template-parameter-1-1>
> >> ::type>::value || B:: value)>::type D::operator=(Expr) [with Expr =
> > int; typename A<(F<typename C< <template-parameter-1-1>
> >> ::type>::value || B:: value)>::type = int]' is private
> > /aci-gcc-fsf/sources/gcc-fsf/gccsrc/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:35:7:
> > error: within this context
> > 
> > Christophe.
> > 
> Oops. Sorry for that, it seems that I messed up with my testing box and
> the backport did not actually get regtested :(.
> 
> The problem is caused by difference in wording of diagnostics. GCC 6
> gives an error on line 35 and a note on line 29:
> 
> $ ./cc1plus ~/gcc/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C
>  void fn1()
> /home/miyuki/gcc/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:35:7:
> error: 'typename A<(F<typename C< <template-parameter-1-1>
> >::type>::value || B:: value)>::type D::operator=(Expr) [with Expr =
> int; typename A<(F<typename C< <template-parameter-1-1> >::type>::value
> || B:: value)>::type = int]' is private within this context
>    opt = 0;
> /home/miyuki/gcc/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:29:3:
> note: declared private here
>    operator=(Expr);
> 
> GCC 5 gives two errors:
> 
> /home/miyuki/gcc/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:29:3:
> error: 'typename A<(F<typename C< <template-parameter-1-1>
> >::type>::value || B:: value)>::type D::operator=(Expr) [with Expr =
> int; typename A<(F<typename C< <template-parameter-1-1> >::type>::value
> || B:: value)>::type = int]' is private
>    operator=(Expr);
> /home/miyuki/gcc/src/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C:35:7:
> error: within this context
>    opt = 0;
> 
> It can probably be fixed like this:
> 
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C
> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C
> index cb16b4c..f658c1d 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C
> @@ -26,11 +26,11 @@ class D
>  {
>    template <class Expr>
>    typename A<F<typename C<Expr>::type>::value || B::value>::type
> -  operator=(Expr); // { dg-message "declared" }
> +  operator=(Expr); // { dg-message "private" }
>  };
> 
>  void fn1()
>  {
>    D opt;
> -  opt = 0; // { dg-error "private" }
> +  opt = 0; // { dg-error "this context" }
>  }
> 
> But I am not sure, what should I do in this case. Maybe it is better to
> remove the failing testcase from GCC 5 branch (provided that
> inhibit-warn-1.C tests a fix for the same bug and does not fail)?

Your fix looks sensible to me, and I'd like to see it applied before
the 5.2 cut. Hopefully someone with the authority to OK the fixup will
be along shortly!

Thanks,
James

On 06/24/2015 04:28 PM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote:
> It can probably be fixed like this:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C
> b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C
> index cb16b4c..f658c1d 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/diagnostic/inhibit-warn-2.C
> @@ -26,11 +26,11 @@ class D
>   {
>     template <class Expr>
>     typename A<F<typename C<Expr>::type>::value || B::value>::type
> -  operator=(Expr); // { dg-message "declared" }
> +  operator=(Expr); // { dg-message "private" }
>   };
>
>   void fn1()
>   {
>     D opt;
> -  opt = 0; // { dg-error "private" }
> +  opt = 0; // { dg-error "this context" }
>   }
>
> But I am not sure, what should I do in this case. Maybe it is better to
> remove the failing testcase from GCC 5 branch (provided that
> inhibit-warn-1.C tests a fix for the same bug and does not fail)?

This patch is OK (and, I think, obvious).  I think it's better to keep 
the testcase.

Jason