On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 22:01:28 +0000 Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > LGTM. I am gun-shy about using iterators while modifying > > containers. I know there are rules. :-/ > > Yes, the erased iterator is invalidated, but it returns an iterator to > the next element after the erased one, so we can continue iterating > from there instead of using the no-invalid one. I did not know that! > The important thing is to _not_ increment in that case, because > erasing *p and then pointing to the next element replaces the > increment. Clearly. :-) > I've read them and they're straightforward. If I > > need to do more than just say that, please direct me. > > OK, thanks. On that topic, should you be listed in the MAINTAINERS > file? I see Bob in there, but don't see your name. We're working on it. I would like enter in MAINTAINERS this line: COBOL front end James K. Lowden <jklow...@cobolworx.com> because that way the firm paying the freight gets to see its name in lights. But as of today that address can't receive mail. (We want it to forward to the system I'm using now, so in short order all my communications will use a business address instead of my personal one.) I'm holding off committing that change until the address works, in case there are other ramifications I don't know about. --jkl
