aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/libgfortran/generated/pow_m8_m2.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorMarek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>2025-02-19 14:06:33 -0500
committerMarek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>2025-02-27 13:45:01 -0500
commit9792126ac769f2962c0f305991818c64f9e51221 (patch)
treed5d6571f9ca052322255b8079873614c5408258a /libgfortran/generated/pow_m8_m2.c
parent3071eb2848a2e748cfd67e8c897890ce06c69d06 (diff)
downloadgcc-9792126ac769f2962c0f305991818c64f9e51221.zip
gcc-9792126ac769f2962c0f305991818c64f9e51221.tar.gz
gcc-9792126ac769f2962c0f305991818c64f9e51221.tar.bz2
c++: ICE with GOTO_EXPR [PR118928]
In this PR we crash in cxx_eval_constant_expression/GOTO_EXPR on: gcc_assert (cxx_dialect >= cxx23); The code obviously doesn't expect to see a goto pre-C++23. But we can get here with the new prvalue optimization. In this test we found ourselves in synthesize_method for X::X(). This function calls: a) finish_function, which does cp_genericize -> ... -> genericize_c_loops, which creates the GOTO_EXPR; b) expand_or_defer_fn -> maybe_clone_body -> ... -> cp_fold_function where we reach the new maybe_constant_init call and crash on the goto. Since we can validly get to that assert, I think we should just remove it. I don't see other similar asserts like this one. PR c++/118928 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * constexpr.cc (cxx_eval_constant_expression) <case GOTO_EXPR>: Remove an assert. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-prvalue5.C: New test. Reviewed-by: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'libgfortran/generated/pow_m8_m2.c')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions