EricWF added a comment.
Overall this patch is *almost* there. My only objection is that this
optimization neglects "unordered_set". Optimally we would also catch
"unordered_set<int>.emplace(42)"
================
Comment at: include/__hash_table:103
@@ -102,1 +102,3 @@
+template <class _Pair, class _Key,
+ class _RawPair = typename __uncvref<_Pair>::type>
----------------
The traits LGTM.
================
Comment at: include/__hash_table:1062
@@ +1061,3 @@
+ return __emplace_unique_extract_key(_VSTD::forward<_Pp>(__x),
+ __is_pair_with_key<_Pp, key_type>());
+ }
----------------
It took me a minute to understand why this doesn't break
`std::unordered_set<std::pair<T, U>>`, could you make either the trait name, or
implementation more explicit about the fact that it only ever returns true for
"unordered_map"?
================
Comment at: test/libcxx/containers/unord/unord.map/insert_dup_alloc.pass.cpp:23
@@ +22,3 @@
+
+ for (int i = 0; i < 100; ++i) {
+ std::pair<const int, int> P(3, i);
----------------
I don't think we need to test 100 different values for the mapped type. Also
you should consider using 'DisableAllocationGuard' instead of
'globalMemCounter` directly. For example:
```
Container c;
c.insert(std::make_pair(1, 1)); // Don't worry about the allocation behavior
here.
{
DisableAllocationGuard g;
// test duplicates that should not allocate in this scope.
}
```
================
Comment at: test/libcxx/containers/unord/unord.map/insert_dup_alloc.pass.cpp:29
@@ +28,3 @@
+ s.insert(s.end(), std::make_pair(3, i));
+#ifndef _LIBCPP_HAS_NO_RVALUE_REFERENCES
+ s.emplace(std::make_pair(3, i));
----------------
Please use "TEST_STD_VER >= 11" instead. The macro is defined it
"test_macros.h".
http://reviews.llvm.org/D16360
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
