aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorMarek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>2023-03-17 14:36:10 -0400
committerMarek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>2023-03-23 09:25:41 -0400
commit59bfdd5f467292a368d0d628084a4b65d1bb06bb (patch)
treef50a5eaa6ce601ea9751a42f0cb8cb7eae11d367
parent3b97715af0e848ef8703ac04665bde562b2ac159 (diff)
downloadgcc-59bfdd5f467292a368d0d628084a4b65d1bb06bb.zip
gcc-59bfdd5f467292a368d0d628084a4b65d1bb06bb.tar.gz
gcc-59bfdd5f467292a368d0d628084a4b65d1bb06bb.tar.bz2
c++: further -Wdangling-reference refinement [PR107532]
Based on <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107532#c24>, it seems like we should treat *any* class with a reference member as a reference wrapper. To suppress the warning in int i = 42; auto const& v = std::get<0>(std::tuple<int&>(i)); we have to look into base classes as well. For std::tuple, this means that we have to check the _Head_base subobject, which is a non-direct base class of std::tuple. So I've employed a DFS walk. PR c++/107532 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * call.cc (class_has_reference_member_p): New. (class_has_reference_member_p_r): New. (reference_like_class_p): Don't look for a specific constructor. Use a DFS walk with class_has_reference_member_p_r. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/warn/Wdangling-reference11.C: New test. * g++.dg/warn/Wdangling-reference12.C: New test.
-rw-r--r--gcc/cp/call.cc63
-rw-r--r--gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wdangling-reference11.C23
-rw-r--r--gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wdangling-reference12.C12
3 files changed, 72 insertions, 26 deletions
diff --git a/gcc/cp/call.cc b/gcc/cp/call.cc
index d5e8ccc..5df0f7d 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/call.cc
+++ b/gcc/cp/call.cc
@@ -13785,8 +13785,31 @@ std_pair_ref_ref_p (tree t)
/* Return true if a class CTYPE is either std::reference_wrapper or
std::ref_view, or a reference wrapper class. We consider a class
- a reference wrapper class if it has a reference member and a
- constructor taking the same reference type. */
+ a reference wrapper class if it has a reference member. We no
+ longer check that it has a constructor taking the same reference type
+ since that approach still generated too many false positives. */
+
+static bool
+class_has_reference_member_p (tree t)
+{
+ for (tree fields = TYPE_FIELDS (t);
+ fields;
+ fields = DECL_CHAIN (fields))
+ if (TREE_CODE (fields) == FIELD_DECL
+ && !DECL_ARTIFICIAL (fields)
+ && TYPE_REF_P (TREE_TYPE (fields)))
+ return true;
+ return false;
+}
+
+/* A wrapper for the above suitable as a callback for dfs_walk_once. */
+
+static tree
+class_has_reference_member_p_r (tree binfo, void *)
+{
+ return (class_has_reference_member_p (BINFO_TYPE (binfo))
+ ? integer_one_node : NULL_TREE);
+}
static bool
reference_like_class_p (tree ctype)
@@ -13802,31 +13825,19 @@ reference_like_class_p (tree ctype)
if (decl_in_std_namespace_p (tdecl))
{
tree name = DECL_NAME (tdecl);
- return (name
- && (id_equal (name, "reference_wrapper")
- || id_equal (name, "span")
- || id_equal (name, "ref_view")));
- }
- for (tree fields = TYPE_FIELDS (ctype);
- fields;
- fields = DECL_CHAIN (fields))
- {
- if (TREE_CODE (fields) != FIELD_DECL || DECL_ARTIFICIAL (fields))
- continue;
- tree type = TREE_TYPE (fields);
- if (!TYPE_REF_P (type))
- continue;
- /* OK, the field is a reference member. Do we have a constructor
- taking its type? */
- for (tree fn : ovl_range (CLASSTYPE_CONSTRUCTORS (ctype)))
- {
- tree args = FUNCTION_FIRST_USER_PARMTYPE (fn);
- if (args
- && same_type_p (TREE_VALUE (args), type)
- && TREE_CHAIN (args) == void_list_node)
- return true;
- }
+ if (name
+ && (id_equal (name, "reference_wrapper")
+ || id_equal (name, "span")
+ || id_equal (name, "ref_view")))
+ return true;
}
+
+ /* Some classes, such as std::tuple, have the reference member in its
+ (non-direct) base class. */
+ if (dfs_walk_once (TYPE_BINFO (ctype), class_has_reference_member_p_r,
+ nullptr, nullptr))
+ return true;
+
return false;
}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wdangling-reference11.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wdangling-reference11.C
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..667618e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wdangling-reference11.C
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+// PR c++/107532
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+// { dg-options "-Wdangling-reference" }
+
+struct R
+{
+ int& r;
+ int& get() { return r; }
+ int&& rget() { return static_cast<int&&>(r); }
+};
+
+int main()
+{
+ int i = 42;
+ int& l = R{i}.get(); // { dg-bogus "dangling reference" }
+ int const& cl = R{i}.get(); // { dg-bogus "dangling reference" }
+ int&& r = R{i}.rget(); // { dg-bogus "dangling reference" }
+ int const&& cr = R{i}.rget(); // { dg-bogus "dangling reference" }
+ (void) l;
+ (void) r;
+ (void) cr;
+ (void) cl;
+}
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wdangling-reference12.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wdangling-reference12.C
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..85e01f0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/warn/Wdangling-reference12.C
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+// PR c++/107532
+// { dg-do compile { target c++11 } }
+// { dg-options "-Wdangling-reference" }
+
+#include <tuple>
+
+int main()
+{
+ int i = 42;
+ auto const& v = std::get<0>(std::tuple<int&>(i)); // { dg-bogus "dangling reference" }
+ (void) v;
+}