--- Comment #11 from dominik dot strasser at onespin-solutions dot com
2009-05-20 14:58 ---
Works fine, thanks.
--
dominik dot strasser at onespin-solutions dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #10 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-14 16:45 ---
Yes, I noticed the much more accurate (and explicit) requirements on
types/algos in concept gcc when hashing through the initial parallel mode work.
I found it very helpful as an implementation (or reimplementation) g
--- Comment #9 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-13 01:36 ---
Fixed.
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from paolo at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-13 01:35 ---
Subject: Bug 34730
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Jan 13 01:34:58 2008
New Revision: 131500
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=131500
Log:
2008-01-12 Paolo Carlini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PR libstd
--- Comment #7 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-12 18:23 ---
Eh! Interestingly, conceptgcc explicitly enforces the concept that the two
value types must equal! Exactly the case that is covered but my almost-ready
patch.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34730
--- Comment #6 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-12 18:12 ---
Thanks for the suggestion, Benjamin. Actually, I don't think we can much better
*without* concepts... Anyway, was thinking that the ordering check is already
impossible to do in other circumstances, like real (single pass)
--- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-11 18:05 ---
Paolo, as a quick aside, you might find it useful to look at the concept GCC
library sources for stuff like this.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34730
--- Comment #4 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-10 20:04 ---
Thinking more about this issue, probably a more sophisticated solution would be
running the checks only when the value_types are equal. I'll try to prepare
something.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3473
--- Comment #3 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-10 16:10 ---
Hi Doug. As the main author of our debug-mode, I'd like to know your opinion
about this issue... On one hand, in the actual algorithm we are not comparing
values from the same range, on the other hand, clearly the specifica
--- Comment #2 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2008-01-10 15:59 ---
Interesting. I agree the code is legal, on the other hand, we want to check the
required ordering... Would it be ok to you to have the check moved to
_GLIBCXX_DEBUG_PEDANTIC??
--
pcarlini at suse dot de changed:
--- Comment #1 from dominik dot strasser at onespin-solutions dot com
2008-01-10 15:28 ---
Created an attachment (id=14909)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=14909&action=view)
Source code showing the problem
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34730
11 matches
Mail list logo
