On 05/06/20 22:24 +0200, François Dumont via Libstdc++ wrote:
Hi
   Here is the last of my algo patches this time to extend the memcmp
optimization to std::deque iterators and _GLIBCXX_DEBUG mode.
   To do so I had to return int in implementation details of
lexicographical_compare to make sure we can treat a deque iterator
range by chunk in a performant way.
Tested under Linux x86_64 normal and debug modes.
           * include/bits/stl_algobase.h
           (__lexicographical_compare_impl): Return int.
           (__lexicographical_compare::__lc): Likewise.
           (__lexicographical_compare_aux1(_II1, _II1, _II2,
_II2)): New.
(__lexicographical_compare_aux1(_Deque_iterator<>, _Deque_iterator<>,
           _II2, _II2)): Declare.
           (__lexicographical_compare_aux1(_II1, _II1,
           _Deque_iterator<>, _Deque_iterator<>)): Declare.
(__lexicographical_compare_aux1(_Deque_iterator<>, _Deque_iterator<>,
           _Deque_iterator<>, _Deque_iterator<>)): Declare.
           (__lexicographical_compare_aux): Adapt, call later.
Is this meant to say "latter"? That's still not correct grammar
though. I think it would be better to name the function it calls
explicitly: "Call __lexicographical_compare_aux1."
           (__lexicographical_compare_aux(_Safe_iterator<>,
_Safe_iterator<>,
           _II2, _II2)): Declare.
           (__lexicographical_compare_aux(_II1, _II1,
           _Safe_iterator<>, _Safe_iterator<>)): Declare.
           (__lexicographical_compare_aux(_Safe_iterator<>,
_Safe_iterator<>,
           _Safe_iterator<>, _Safe_iterator<>)): Declare.
           (std::lexicographical_compare): Adapt, call later without
__niter_base
           usage.
           * include/bits/deque.tcc (__lex_cmp_dit): New.
           (__lexicographical_compare_aux1): New.
           * include/debug/safe_iterator.tcc
           (__lexicographical_compare_aux(const _Safe_iterator<>&,
           const _Safe_iterator<>&, _II2, _II2)): New.
           (__lexicographical_compare_aux(
           const _Safe_iterator<>&, const_Safe_iterator<>&,
           const _Safe_iterator<>&, const _Safe_iterator<>&)): New.
           * testsuite/25_algorithms/lexicographical_compare/1.cc
(test6, test7):
           New.
           *
testsuite/25_algorithms/lexicographical_compare/deque_iterators/1.cc:
           New test.
Ok to commit ?
François
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/deque.tcc
b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/deque.tcc
index 1d32a1691c7..d7dbe64f3e1 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/deque.tcc
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/deque.tcc
@@ -1261,6 +1261,98 @@ _GLIBCXX_END_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER
return true;
}
+ template<typename _Tp, typename _Ref, typename _Ptr, typename _II>
_II is the wrong name here, it mean InputIterator. All callers of this
function are constrained for random access iterators. This cannot be
called with an input iterator. Please use _RAIter.
+ int
+ __lex_cmp_dit(
+ const _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp, _Ref, _Ptr>& __first1,
+ const _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp, _Ref, _Ptr>& __last1,
+ _II __first2, _II __last2)
+ {
+ typedef _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp, _Ref, _Ptr> _Iter;
+ typedef typename _Iter::difference_type difference_type;
+
+ if (__first1._M_node != __last1._M_node)
+ {
+ difference_type __len = __last2 - __first2;
+ difference_type __flen
What does "flen" mean? Why not use len2 for last2 - first2, as we do
elsewhere? And then use len for min(len1, len2)?
+ = std::min(__len, __first1._M_last - __first1._M_cur);
+ if (int __ret = std::__lexicographical_compare_aux1(
This call (and the three later in this function) will do overload
resolution again on the full set of __lexicographical_compare_aux1
overloads, which includes the ones for deque iterators. But we know
that __first1._M_cur and __first1._M_last are not deque iterators.
__first2 could be a deque iterator, but I'm not sure if we really want
one function that has to handle that case anyway.
+ __first1._M_cur, __first1._M_last, __first2, __first2 + __flen))
+ return __ret;
+
+ __first2 += __flen;
+ __len -= __flen;
+ __flen = std::min<size_t>(__len, _Iter::_S_buffer_size());
+ for (typename _Iter::_Map_pointer __node = __first1._M_node + 1;
+ __node != __last1._M_node;
+ __first2 += __flen, __len -= __flen,
+ __flen = std::min<size_t>(__len, _Iter::_S_buffer_size()),
+ ++__node)
+ if (int __ret = std::__lexicographical_compare_aux1(
+ *__node, *__node + _Iter::_S_buffer_size(),
+ __first2, __first2 + __flen))
+ return __ret;
+
+ return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux1(
+ __last1._M_first, __last1._M_cur, __first2, __last2);
+ }
+
+ return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux1(
+ __first1._M_cur, __last1._M_cur, __first2, __last2);
+ }
+
+ template<typename _Tp1, typename _Ref1, typename _Ptr1,
+ typename _II2>
This is not an input iterator either.
+ typename __gnu_cxx::__enable_if<
+ __is_random_access_iter<_II2>::__value, int>::__type
This should be inline.
Also, I'm curious why these overloads use __enable_if rather than the
conventional approach of tag dispatching using iterator_category.
(The same question applies to th __equal_aux1 and __copy_move_a1
overloads for deque iterators as well). It doesn't really matter
though.
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux1(
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp1, _Ref1, _Ptr1> __first1,
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp1, _Ref1, _Ptr1> __last1,
+ _II2 __first2, _II2 __last2)
+ { return std::__lex_cmp_dit(__first1, __last1, __first2, __last2); }
+
+ template<typename _Tp1, typename _Ref1, typename _Ptr1,
+ typename _Tp2, typename _Ref2, typename _Ptr2>
+ int
This should be inline.
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux1(
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp1, _Ref1, _Ptr1> __first1,
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp1, _Ref1, _Ptr1> __last1,
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp2, _Ref2, _Ptr2> __first2,
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp2, _Ref2, _Ptr2> __last2)
+ { return std::__lex_cmp_dit(__first1, __last1, __first2, __last2); }
I'm not convinced it's useful for this function and the one above it
to share the same logic.
+ template<typename _II1,
+ typename _Tp2, typename _Ref2, typename _Ptr2>
+ typename __gnu_cxx::__enable_if<
+ __is_random_access_iter<_II1>::__value, int>::__type
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux1(
+ _II1 __first1, _II1 __last1,
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp2, _Ref2, _Ptr2> __first2,
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp2, _Ref2, _Ptr2> __last2)
+ {
+ typedef _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp2, _Ref2, _Ptr2> _Iter;
+ typedef typename _Iter::difference_type difference_type;
+
+ difference_type __len = __last1 - __first1;
+ while (__len > 0)
+ {
+ const difference_type __flen = __first2._M_node == __last2._M_node
+ ? __last2._M_cur - __first2._M_cur
+ : __first2._M_last - __first2._M_cur;
+ const difference_type __clen = std::min(__len, __flen);
"flen"? "clen"?
+ if (int __ret = std::__lexicographical_compare_aux1(
+ __first1, __first1 + __clen,
+ __first2._M_cur, __first2._M_cur + __flen))
+ return __ret;
+
+ __first1 += __clen;
+ __len -= __clen;
+ __first2 += __clen;
+ }
+
+ return __first1 == __last1 ? (__first2 != __last2 ? -1 : 0) : 1;
Isn't this function doing basically the same as __lex_cmp_dit? Why
does it not use the same logic?
Can this whole function just negate the result of __lex_cmp_dit called
with the arguments switched?
return -std::__lex_cmp_dit(__first2, __last2, __first1, __last1);
That would also fix the bug that makes the following loop forever:
std::deque<int> d;
int i = 0;
std::lexicographical_compare(&i, &i + 1, d.begin(), d.end());
+ }
+
_GLIBCXX_END_NAMESPACE_VERSION
} // namespace std
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_algobase.h
b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_algobase.h
index 0163d8f902d..ecc50a10c9d 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_algobase.h
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/bits/stl_algobase.h
@@ -1279,7 +1279,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_END_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER
template<typename _II1, typename _II2, typename _Compare>
_GLIBCXX20_CONSTEXPR
- bool
+ int
__lexicographical_compare_impl(_II1 __first1, _II1 __last1,
_II2 __first2, _II2 __last2,
_Compare __comp)
@@ -1288,16 +1288,18 @@ _GLIBCXX_END_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER
typedef typename iterator_traits<_II2>::iterator_category _Category2;
typedef std::__lc_rai<_Category1, _Category2> __rai_type;
- __last1 = __rai_type::__newlast1(__first1, __last1, __first2, __last2);
- for (; __first1 != __last1 && __rai_type::__cnd2(__first2, __last2);
+ _II1 __new_last1
+ = __rai_type::__newlast1(__first1, __last1, __first2, __last2);
+ for (; __first1 != __new_last1 && __rai_type::__cnd2(__first2, __last2);
++__first1, (void)++__first2)
{
if (__comp(__first1, __first2))
- return true;
+ return -1;
if (__comp(__first2, __first1))
- return false;
+ return 1;
}
- return __first1 == __last1 && __first2 != __last2;
+
+ return __first1 == __last1 ? (__first2 != __last2 ? -1 : 0) : 1;
This is going to produce worse code for the common (non-deque) case,
isn't it?
}
template<bool _BoolType>
@@ -1305,7 +1307,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_END_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER
{
template<typename _II1, typename _II2>
_GLIBCXX20_CONSTEXPR
- static bool
+ static int
__lc(_II1 __first1, _II1 __last1, _II2 __first2, _II2 __last2)
{
using __gnu_cxx::__ops::__iter_less_iter;
@@ -1320,7 +1322,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_END_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER
{
template<typename _Tp, typename _Up>
_GLIBCXX20_CONSTEXPR
- static bool
+ static int
__lc(const _Tp* __first1, const _Tp* __last1,
const _Up* __first2, const _Up* __last2)
{
@@ -1328,16 +1330,44 @@ _GLIBCXX_END_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER
const size_t __len2 = __last2 - __first2;
if (const size_t __len = std::min(__len1, __len2))
if (int __result = std::__memcmp(__first1, __first2, __len))
- return __result < 0;
- return __len1 < __len2;
+ return __result;
+
+ return __len1 < __len2 ? -1 : (__len2 < __len1 ? 1 : 0);
Again, this will produce worse code.
If you made it return ptrdiff_t instead of int you could just do:
return ptrdiff_t(__len1 - __len2);
But I think we should just not change these __lc helpers, and not try
to reuse them for deque iterators. We can define new helpers that
return the 3-way result that is needed for comparing deque iterators.
+ template<typename _Tp1, typename _Ref1, typename _Ptr1,
+ typename _II2>
+ typename __gnu_cxx::__enable_if<
+ __is_random_access_iter<_II2>::__value, int>::__type
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux1(
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp1, _Ref1, _Ptr1>,
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp1, _Ref1, _Ptr1>,
+ _II2, _II2);
+
+ template<typename _II1,
+ typename _Tp2, typename _Ref2, typename _Ptr2>
+ typename __gnu_cxx::__enable_if<
+ __is_random_access_iter<_II1>::__value, int>::__type
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux1(
+ _II1, _II1,
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp2, _Ref2, _Ptr2>,
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp2, _Ref2, _Ptr2>);
+
+ template<typename _Tp1, typename _Ref1, typename _Ptr1,
+ typename _Tp2, typename _Ref2, typename _Ptr2>
+ int
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux1(
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp1, _Ref1, _Ptr1>,
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp1, _Ref1, _Ptr1>,
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp2, _Ref2, _Ptr2>,
+ _GLIBCXX_STD_C::_Deque_iterator<_Tp2, _Ref2, _Ptr2>);
+
template<typename _II1, typename _II2>
_GLIBCXX20_CONSTEXPR
- inline bool
- __lexicographical_compare_aux(_II1 __first1, _II1 __last1,
- _II2 __first2, _II2 __last2)
+ inline int
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux1(_II1 __first1, _II1 __last1,
+ _II2 __first2, _II2 __last2)
If you rename this to __lexicographical_compare_aux2 instead and add
a one-line forwarding function called __lexicographical_compare_aux1,
then the code above for deque iterators can call the aux2 overload
directly, to avoid doing overload resolution on aux1 again.
{
typedef typename iterator_traits<_II1>::value_type _ValueType1;
typedef typename iterator_traits<_II2>::value_type _ValueType2;
@@ -1360,6 +1390,43 @@ _GLIBCXX_END_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER
__first2, __last2);
}
+ template<typename _II1, typename _II2>
+ _GLIBCXX20_CONSTEXPR
+ inline int
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux(_II1 __first1, _II1 __last1,
+ _II2 __first2, _II2 __last2)
+ {
+ return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux1(std::__niter_base(__first1),
+ std::__niter_base(__last1),
+ std::__niter_base(__first2),
+ std::__niter_base(__last2));
+ }
+
+ template<typename _Ite1, typename _Seq1, typename _Cat1,
Please don't introduce any more "Ite" parameters, this should be _It1
or _Iter1.
+ typename _II2>
+ int
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux(
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite1, _Seq1, _Cat1>&,
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite1, _Seq1, _Cat1>&,
+ _II2, _II2);
+
+ template<typename _II1,
+ typename _Ite2, typename _Seq2, typename _Cat2>
+ int
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux(
+ _II1, _II1,
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite2, _Seq2, _Cat2>&,
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite2, _Seq2, _Cat2>&);
+
+ template<typename _Ite1, typename _Seq1, typename _Cat1,
+ typename _Ite2, typename _Seq2, typename _Cat2>
+ int
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux(
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite1, _Seq1, _Cat1>&,
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite1, _Seq1, _Cat1>&,
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite2, _Seq2, _Cat2>&,
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite2, _Seq2, _Cat2>&);
+
template<typename _ForwardIterator, typename _Tp, typename _Compare>
_GLIBCXX20_CONSTEXPR
_ForwardIterator
@@ -1659,10 +1726,8 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_ALGO
__glibcxx_requires_valid_range(__first1, __last1);
__glibcxx_requires_valid_range(__first2, __last2);
- return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux(std::__niter_base(__first1),
- std::__niter_base(__last1),
- std::__niter_base(__first2),
- std::__niter_base(__last2));
+ return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux(__first1, __last1,
+ __first2, __last2) < 0;
Why does __lexicographical_compare_aux need to change to return int?
It looks like only __lexicographical_compare_aux1 gets called
recursively for deque iterators, so only that needs to be able to
return -1/0/+1 values.
}
/**
@@ -1692,7 +1757,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_ALGO
return std::__lexicographical_compare_impl
(__first1, __last1, __first2, __last2,
- __gnu_cxx::__ops::__iter_comp_iter(__comp));
+ __gnu_cxx::__ops::__iter_comp_iter(__comp)) < 0;
}
#if __cpp_lib_three_way_comparison
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/safe_iterator.tcc
b/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/safe_iterator.tcc
index 888ac803ae5..ca4e2d52d1d 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/safe_iterator.tcc
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/safe_iterator.tcc
@@ -470,6 +470,80 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
return __equal_aux1(__first1, __last1, __first2);
}
+ template<typename _Ite1, typename _Seq1, typename _Cat1,
+ typename _II2>
+ int
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux(
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite1, _Seq1, _Cat1>& __first1,
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite1, _Seq1, _Cat1>& __last1,
+ _II2 __first2, _II2 __last2)
+ {
+ typename ::__gnu_debug::_Distance_traits<_Ite1>::__type __dist1;
+ __glibcxx_check_valid_range2(__first1, __last1, __dist1);
+ __glibcxx_check_valid_range(__first2, __last2);
+
+ if (__dist1.second > ::__gnu_debug::__dp_equality)
+ return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux(__first1.base(),
+ __last1.base(),
+ __first2, __last2);
+ return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux1(__first1, __last1,
+ __first2, __last2);
+ }
+
+ template<typename _II1,
+ typename _Ite2, typename _Seq2, typename _Cat2>
+ int
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux(
+ _II1 __first1, _II1 __last1,
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite2, _Seq2, _Cat2>& __first2,
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite2, _Seq2, _Cat2>& __last2)
+ {
+ __glibcxx_check_valid_range(__first1, __last1);
+ typename ::__gnu_debug::_Distance_traits<_II1>::__type __dist2;
+ __glibcxx_check_valid_range2(__first2, __last2, __dist2);
+
+ if (__dist2.second > ::__gnu_debug::__dp_equality)
+ return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux(__first1, __last1,
+ __first2.base(),
+ __last2.base());
+ return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux1(__first1, __last1,
+ __first2, __last2);
+ }
+
+ template<typename _Ite1, typename _Seq1, typename _Cat1,
+ typename _Ite2, typename _Seq2, typename _Cat2>
+ int
+ __lexicographical_compare_aux(
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite1, _Seq1, _Cat1>& __first1,
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite1, _Seq1, _Cat1>& __last1,
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite2, _Seq2, _Cat2>& __first2,
+ const ::__gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Ite2, _Seq2, _Cat2>& __last2)
+ {
+ typename ::__gnu_debug::_Distance_traits<_Ite1>::__type __dist1;
+ __glibcxx_check_valid_range2(__first1, __last1, __dist1);
+ typename ::__gnu_debug::_Distance_traits<_Ite2>::__type __dist2;
+ __glibcxx_check_valid_range2(__first2, __last2, __dist2);
+
+ if (__dist1.second > ::__gnu_debug::__dp_equality)
+ {
+ if (__dist2.second > ::__gnu_debug::__dp_equality)
+ return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux(__first1.base(),
+ __last1.base(),
+ __first2.base(),
+ __last2.base());
+ return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux(__first1.base(),
+ __last1.base(),
+ __first2, __last2);
+ }
+
+ if (__dist2.second > ::__gnu_debug::__dp_equality)
+ return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux(__first1, __last1,
+ __first2.base(),
+ __last2.base());
+ return std::__lexicographical_compare_aux1(__first1, __last1,
+ __first2, __last2);
+ }
+
_GLIBCXX_END_NAMESPACE_VERSION
} // namespace std
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/25_algorithms/lexicographical_compare/1.cc
b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/25_algorithms/lexicographical_compare/1.cc
index 8c2f043f943..b8f92bacd85 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/25_algorithms/lexicographical_compare/1.cc
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/25_algorithms/lexicographical_compare/1.cc
@@ -74,6 +74,29 @@ test5()
con2.begin(), con2.end()) );
}
+void
+test6()
+{
+ VERIFY( std::lexicographical_compare(array2, array2 + 2,
+ array3, array3 + 3) );
+ VERIFY( !std::lexicographical_compare(array3, array3 + 3,
+ array2, array2 + 2) );
+}
+
+using __gnu_test::random_access_iterator_wrapper;
+typedef test_container<int, random_access_iterator_wrapper> RaiContainer;
Since last week you can use __gnu_test::random_access_container<int>
for this.
+void
+test7()
+{
+ RaiContainer con2(array2, array2 + 2);
+ RaiContainer con3(array3, array3 + 3);
+ VERIFY( std::lexicographical_compare(con2.begin(), con2.end(),
+ con3.begin(), con3.end()) );
+ VERIFY( !std::lexicographical_compare(con3.begin(), con3.end(),
+ con2.begin(), con2.end()) );
+}
+
int
main()
{
@@ -82,4 +105,6 @@ main()
test3();
test4();
test5();
+ test6();
+ test7();
}
diff --git
a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/25_algorithms/lexicographical_compare/deque_iterators/1.cc
b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/25_algorithms/lexicographical_compare/deque_iterators/1.cc
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..c686ad5677d
--- /dev/null
+++
b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/25_algorithms/lexicographical_compare/deque_iterators/1.cc
@@ -0,0 +1,134 @@
+// Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+//
+// This file is part of the GNU ISO C++ Library. This library is free
+// software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the
+// terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the
+// Free Software Foundation; either version 3, or (at your option)
+// any later version.
+
+// This library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+// but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+// MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
+// GNU General Public License for more details.
+
+// You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along
+// with this library; see the file COPYING3. If not see
+// <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
+
+#include <algorithm>
+#include <vector>
+#include <deque>
+
+#include <ext/new_allocator.h>
+#include <ext/malloc_allocator.h>
+
+#include <testsuite_hooks.h>
+
+void test01()
+{
+ using namespace std;
+
+ deque<int> d;
+ for (int i = 0; i != _GLIBCXX_STD_C::__deque_buf_size(sizeof(int)); ++i)
+ d.push_back(i);
+
+ const deque<int>& cd = d;
+
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(cd.begin(), cd.end(), cd.begin(), cd.end())
);
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(cd.begin(), cd.end(), d.begin(), d.end()) );
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(d.begin(), d.end(), d.begin(), d.end()) );
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(d.begin(), d.end(), cd.begin(), cd.end()) );
+}
+
+void test02()
+{
+ using namespace std;
+
+ deque<int> d;
+ for (int i = 0; i != 1000; ++i)
+ d.push_back(i % 10);
+
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(d.begin(), d.begin() + 10,
+ d.begin() + 20, d.begin() + 30) );
+ VERIFY( lexicographical_compare(d.begin(), d.begin() + 10,
+ d.begin() + 20, d.begin() + 31) );
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(d.begin() + 10, d.end() - 10,
+ d.begin(), d.end() - 20) );
+
+ const deque<int>& cd = d;
+
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(cd.begin(), cd.begin() + 10,
+ cd.begin() + 20, cd.begin() + 30) );
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(cd.begin() + 10, cd.end() - 10,
+ d.begin(), d.end() - 20) );
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(d.begin() + 10, d.end() - 10,
+ cd.begin(), cd.end() - 20) );
+}
+
+void test03()
+{
+ using namespace std;
+
+ deque<int> d1;
+ for (int i = 0; i != 1000; ++i)
+ d1.push_back(i % 10);
+
+ deque<int> d2(d1);
+ for (int i = 0; i != 10; ++i)
+ d2.pop_front();
+
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(d1.begin(), d1.begin() + 10,
+ d2.begin(), d2.begin() + 10) );
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(d1.begin() + 10, d1.end() - 10,
+ d2.begin(), d2.end() - 10) );
+
+ const deque<int>& cd1 = d1;
+ const deque<int>& cd2 = d2;
+
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(cd1.begin(), cd1.begin() + 10,
+ cd2.begin() + 20, cd2.begin() + 30) );
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(cd1.begin() + 10, cd1.end() - 10,
+ d2.begin(), d2.end() - 10) );
+ VERIFY( lexicographical_compare(cd2.begin() + 10, cd2.end() - 10,
+ cd1.begin(), cd1.end() - 20) );
+}
+
+void test04()
+{
+ using namespace std;
+
+ deque<int> d;
+ for (int i = 0; i != 1024; ++i)
+ d.push_back(i);
+
+ vector<int> v(d.begin(), d.end());
+
+ VERIFY( lexicographical_compare(d.begin() + 5, d.end() - 1, v.begin() + 5,
v.end()) );
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(v.begin(), v.end(), d.begin(), d.end()) );
+
+ const deque<int>& cd = d;
+
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(cd.begin(), cd.end(), v.begin(), v.end()) );
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(v.begin(), v.end(), cd.begin(), cd.end()) );
+}
+
+void test05()
+{
+ using namespace std;
+
+ int a[] = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 };
+ deque<int, __gnu_cxx::new_allocator<int> > d1(a, a + 5);
+ deque<int, __gnu_cxx::malloc_allocator<int> > d2(a, a + 5);
+
+ VERIFY( !lexicographical_compare(d1.begin(), d1.end(), d2.begin(), d2.end())
);
+}
+
+int main()
+{
+ test01();
+ test02();
+ test03();
+ test04();
+ test05();
+ return 0;
+}
