On 11/05/20 14:09 +0200, François Dumont via Libstdc++ wrote:
On 11/05/20 12:51 pm, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
On Mon, 11 May 2020 at 00:09, François Dumont via Libstdc++
wrote:
I just committed this patch.
This was a commit-without-review. When the patch was originally
posted, the maintainer
On 11/05/20 12:51 pm, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
On Mon, 11 May 2020 at 00:09, François Dumont via Libstdc++
wrote:
I just committed this patch.
This was a commit-without-review. When the patch was originally
posted, the maintainer said
"Let's revisit it in a few weeks.". That's not the same as
On Mon, 11 May 2020 at 00:09, François Dumont via Libstdc++
wrote:
>
> I just committed this patch.
This was a commit-without-review. When the patch was originally
posted, the maintainer said
"Let's revisit it in a few weeks.". That's not the same as "OK when
stage1 reopens."
On 10/05/20 23:03 +0200, François Dumont via Libstdc++ wrote:
I just committed this patch.
François
On 03/03/20 10:11 pm, François Dumont wrote:
After the fix of PR 91910 I tried to consider other possible race
condition and I think we still have a problem.
Like stated in the PR when a co
I just committed this patch.
François
On 03/03/20 10:11 pm, François Dumont wrote:
After the fix of PR 91910 I tried to consider other possible race
condition and I think we still have a problem.
Like stated in the PR when a container is destroyed all associated
iterators are made singular.
On 03/03/20 22:11 +0100, François Dumont wrote:
After the fix of PR 91910 I tried to consider other possible race
condition and I think we still have a problem.
Like stated in the PR when a container is destroyed all associated
iterators are made singular. If at the same time another thread tr
