|
111
|
1 // PR c++/20280
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
3 // { dg-do compile }
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
5 // Gimplification of the COND_EXPR used to fail because it had an
|
|
|
6 // addressable type, and create_tmp_var rejected that.
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
8 struct A
|
|
|
9 {
|
|
|
10 ~A();
|
|
|
11 };
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
13 struct B : A {};
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
15 A& foo();
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
17 void bar(bool b)
|
|
|
18 {
|
|
|
19 (B&) (b ? foo() : foo());
|
|
|
20 }
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
22 // Make sure bit-fields and addressable types don't cause crashes.
|
|
|
23 // These were not in the original bug report.
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
25 // Added by Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
27 // Copyright 2005 Free Software Foundation
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
29 struct X
|
|
|
30 {
|
|
|
31 long i : 32, j, k : 32;
|
|
|
32 };
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
34 void g(long&);
|
|
|
35 void h(const long&);
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
37 void f(X &x, bool b)
|
|
|
38 {
|
|
|
39 (b ? x.i : x.j) = 1;
|
|
|
40 (b ? x.j : x.k) = 2;
|
|
|
41 (b ? x.i : x.k) = 3;
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
43 (void)(b ? x.i : x.j);
|
|
|
44 (void)(b ? x.i : x.k);
|
|
|
45 (void)(b ? x.j : x.k);
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
47 g (b ? x.i : x.j); // { dg-error "cannot bind bitfield" }
|
|
|
48 g (b ? x.i : x.k); // { dg-error "cannot bind bitfield" }
|
|
|
49 g (b ? x.j : x.k); // { dg-error "cannot bind bitfield" }
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
51 // It's not entirely clear whether these should be accepted. The
|
|
|
52 // conditional expressions are lvalues for sure, and 8.5.3/5 exempts
|
|
|
53 // lvalues for bit-fields, but it's not clear that conditional
|
|
|
54 // expressions that are lvalues and that have at least one possible
|
|
|
55 // result that is a bit-field lvalue meets this condition.
|
|
|
56 h (b ? x.i : x.j);
|
|
|
57 h (b ? x.i : x.k);
|
|
|
58 h (b ? x.j : x.k);
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
60 (long &)(b ? x.i : x.j); // { dg-error "address of bit-field" }
|
|
|
61 (long &)(b ? x.i : x.k); // { dg-error "address of bit-field" }
|
|
|
62 (long &)(b ? x.j : x.k); // { dg-error "address of bit-field" }
|
|
|
63 }
|
