On 9/17/2011 5:38 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
On 09/17/2011 11:27 AM, François Dumont wrote:
Paolo, I know that using float equality comparison is not reliable in
general and I have remove the suspicious line but in this case I can't
imagine a system where it could fail.
As a general policy, in th
On 09/17/2011 11:27 AM, François Dumont wrote:
Paolo, I know that using float equality comparison is not reliable in
general and I have remove the suspicious line but in this case I can't
imagine a system where it could fail.
As a general policy, in the testsuite we should never assert equality
On 09/16/2011 03:00 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Ok... but:
+ us.max_load_factor(.5f);
+ VERIFY( us.max_load_factor() == .5f );
as we discussed already (didn't we?), this kind of VERIFY is in
general very brittle (even if on the widespread base-2 systems
probably we are lucky in this *s
... Francois, your patch, as applied had nasty typos, which probably
broke the build (or we lacking tons of testcases ;) I committed the below.
Paolo.
PS: I think the fix could be suited also for the branch, maybe after a
couple of weeks of testing...
///
2011-07-24 Paolo Ca
On 07/24/2011 09:24 PM, François Dumont wrote:
For info, I will submit a proposal for DR 41975 tomorrow or the day
after.
Oh, excellent, and good idea saying it in advance.
Paolo.
On 07/24/2011 01:31 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
On 07/23/2011 10:31 PM, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
While working on DR 41975 I realized a small issue in current
rehash implementation that sometimes lead to load_factor being
greater than max_load_factor. Here is a patch to fix that:
Ok, good.
