On Sep 13, 2013, at 12:13 AM, Chandler Carruth <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 7:55 PM, Howard Hinnant <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
>> Sorry Marshall.  Great job, but hold off on the commit.  I think we need to 
>> sort this out.
> 
> Jumping up a few layers of context...
> 
> I'm actually fine checking in dynarray with a heap-only implementation. If 
> anything, so that we can demonstrate more fully that yes, we implemented 
> everything, and shockingly enough found problems. If the problems persuade 
> the committee to reconsider dynarray for C++14, wonderful. But it doesn't 
> seem unreasonable to track the draft as it progresses...

Ok, thanks for your comments on this Chandler.

This looks like a mess to me.

But let's get Marshall's work checked in.  At the very least it will give the 
clang team a little easier access to this work for experimentation.

This is the first time I've committed beta software to libc++.  Up until now 
libc++ tip-of-trunk is always in a shippable state.  In this case things are 
mitigated by the #if _LIBCPP_STD_VER > 11 protection.  But I don't want to make 
a habit of checking in half-baked projects.

My goal is to get dynarray into a shippable state, or remove it, asap.  I 
consider it not-shippable as long as it has no stack allocation support.

Sorry for jerking you around on this Marshall.  You've done a great job with 
this.  Please commit.

Howard


_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to