Placement new can modify const-qualified variables

[tbaederr]

Consider:

namespace std {
  using size_t = decltype(sizeof(0));
}

void *operator new(std::size_t, void *p) { return p; }
void* operator new[] (std::size_t, void* p) {return p;}

constexpr int foo() {
  const int a = 10;

  new ((int*)&a) int(12);

  return a;
}
static_assert(foo() == 12);

https://godbolt.org/z/7jj8YsE8r

This should not be accepted of course.

This might be a good first issue, I'm not sure. Maybe @cor3ntin can comment on that.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/issue-subscribers-clang-frontend

Author: Timm Baeder (tbaederr)

Consider: ```c++ namespace std { using size_t = decltype(sizeof(0)); }

void operator new(std::size_t, void p) { return p; }
void operator new[] (std::size_t, void p) {return p;}

constexpr int foo() {
const int a = 10;

new ((int*)&a) int(12);

return a;
}
static_assert(foo() == 12);

https://godbolt.org/z/7jj8YsE8r

This should not be accepted of course.

This might be a good first issue, I'm not sure. Maybe @<!-- -->cor3ntin can comment on that.
</details>

[tbaederr]

On the positive side, mutable works:

struct S {
  mutable int a;
};

constexpr int foo() {

  const S s{10};

  new ((int*)&s.a) int(12);

  return s.a;
}
static_assert(foo() == 12);

[shafik]

Looks like a clang-20 regression: https://godbolt.org/z/ErnanEjGf

Just a good habit to get into to always see how far back and issue goes.

[shafik]

This looks specific to C++26: https://godbolt.org/z/d33qY94Ko

Which is not what I expected.

[tbaederr]

It also works before that if you use the construct_at special case instead: https://godbolt.org/z/esoYbf73b

Also works in older clangs: https://godbolt.org/z/xoa4EoYWo

[llvmbot]

Hi!

This issue may be a good introductory issue for people new to working on LLVM. If you would like to work on this issue, your first steps are:

1. Check that no other contributor has already been assigned to this issue. If you believe that no one is actually working on it despite an assignment, ping the person. After one week without a response, the assignee may be changed.
2. In the comments of this issue, request for it to be assigned to you, or just create a pull request after following the steps below. Mention this issue in the description of the pull request.
3. Fix the issue locally.
4. Run the test suite locally. Remember that the subdirectories under test/ create fine-grained testing targets, so you can e.g. use make check-clang-ast to only run Clang's AST tests.
5. Create a Git commit.
6. Run git clang-format HEAD~1 to format your changes.
7. Open a pull request to the upstream repository on GitHub. Detailed instructions can be found in GitHub's documentation. Mention this issue in the description of the pull request.

If you have any further questions about this issue, don't hesitate to ask via a comment in the thread below.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/issue-subscribers-good-first-issue

Author: Timm Baeder (tbaederr)

Consider: ```c++ namespace std { using size_t = decltype(sizeof(0)); }

void operator new(std::size_t, void p) { return p; }
void operator new[] (std::size_t, void p) {return p;}

constexpr int foo() {
const int a = 10;

new ((int*)&a) int(12);

return a;
}
static_assert(foo() == 12);

https://godbolt.org/z/7jj8YsE8r

This should not be accepted of course.

This might be a good first issue, I'm not sure. Maybe @<!-- -->cor3ntin can comment on that.
</details>