On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 11:47 AM Matthias Kretz <m.kr...@gsi.de> wrote: > > While reading the hash_map code I noticed this inconsistency. Bootstrapped and > regtested on x86_64. OK for trunk?
I've inspected two users of said overload and they return true. Did you look at the rest? I assume that bootstrapping and testing with asserting that the callback never returns false in that overload should succeed? That said, the inconsistency is bad - but how can we be sure we're not relying on that? I mean more than just bootstrapping and regtesting ;) Thanks, Richard. > > The hash_map::traverse overload taking a non-const Value pointer breaks > if the callback returns false. The other overload should behave the > same. > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Kretz <m.kr...@gsi.de> > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * hash-map.h (hash_map::traverse): Let both overloads behave the > same. > --- > gcc/hash-map.h | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > -- > ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── > Dr. Matthias Kretz https://mattkretz.github.io > GSI Helmholtz Centre for Heavy Ion Research https://gsi.de > stdₓ::simd > ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
