On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 02:11, Patrick Palka via Libstdc++ <libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > Tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, does this look OK for trunk? FWIW using
OK, thanks. > variant<_PatternIter, _InnerIter> in the implementation means we need to > include <variant> from <ranges>, which increases the preprocessed size > of <ranges> by 3% (51.5k vs 53k). I suppose that's an acceptable cost? Yeah, I don't think we want to reimplement a lightweight std::variant, because that would just add even more code. As I mentioned on IRC, maybe we could optimize the compilation time for some of the visitation using P2637R0, but that can be done later.
