https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114260
--- Comment #2 from Howard Hinnant ---
This:
2024-03-05 00:00:00
2024-03-04 23:59:33
looks like correct output to me.
sys_time and utc_time map to the same civil calendar date/time (except during a
leap second). That is 2024-03-05 00:00:00 s
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114244
--- Comment #4 from Howard Hinnant ---
Not positive (because I don't know your code that well), but I think:
__s = round<_Duration>(__fs);
will do it.
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: howard.hinnant at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I'm not sure if this is a bug or just QOI. But consider:
#include
#include
#include
using time_point_t = std::chrono::sys_time;
time_point_t decryp
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114240
--- Comment #2 from Howard Hinnant ---
In my date lib I just presumed 00:00:00 time of day when parsing time_points,
unless the parse produced another time of day. Though I must admit that this
didn't come through in the spec. So there is a li
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: howard.hinnant at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
#include
#include
#include
int main(int argc, char**argv){
std::istringstream ssStart{"2024-01-01"};
std::ist
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78714
Howard Hinnant changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howard.hinnant at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71367
--- Comment #2 from Howard Hinnant ---
Just so this point doesn't go unnoticed, parsing should be case-insensitive.
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: howard.hinnant at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
This should compile, but does not:
#include
#include
template
using sys_time = std::chrono::time_point;
int
main
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67631
--- Comment #10 from Howard Hinnant ---
Thanks much Jason!
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67631
--- Comment #6 from Howard Hinnant ---
Dropping the `explicit` specifier for the operator is an "over my dead body",
sorry. That would be horrible. The next best workaround is to "respell" the
explicit int operator() as `as_int() const`. But t
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67631
--- Comment #4 from Howard Hinnant ---
This bug needs some attention because Howard Hinnant's date library is making
it common for people to hit this bug.
The date library:
https://github.com/HowardHinnant/date
This library is sufficiently pop
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917
--- Comment #15 from Howard Hinnant ---
To help clarify my proposal, here is a patch:
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/thread.cc
b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/thread.cc
index 906cafa..cfca178 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/thread.cc
+++ b/lib
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55917
Howard Hinnant changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howard.hinnant at gmail dot com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68190
--- Comment #9 from Howard Hinnant ---
Untested fix suggested:
#if __cplusplus > 201103L
template
auto
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68190
--- Comment #2 from Howard Hinnant ---
LWG 103 isn't the issue.
http://melpon.org/wandbox/permlink/MzOWaFpvFRtgaa7t
C::iterator is std::_Rb_tree_const_iterator
C::const_iterator is std::_Rb_tree_const_iterator
C::find(1u) returns std::_R
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: howard.hinnant at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
This fails to compile because template set::find is returning the
wrong iterator type (I think).
#include
struct Comparator
{
using
: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: howard.hinnant at gmail dot com
Target Milestone: ---
I expect this program to compile and not assert when run:
#include
template
void
test(const U& uo)
{
T t{uo};
U u{t};
assert(u == uo);
t = T{uo};
u = U{t};
asse
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54316
--- Comment #8 from Howard Hinnant ---
Here:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2005/n1862.html#27.4.4%20-%20Class%20template%20basic_ios
is a good list of what needs to be done. It is an old paper, so it needs to be
cross-check
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54316
Howard Hinnant changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||howard.hinnant at gmail dot com
19 matches
Mail list logo
