http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #20 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-12-06 15:13:10 UTC ---
Author: paolo
Date: Tue Dec 6 15:13:04 2011
New Revision: 182054
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=182054
Log:
2011-12-06 Jonathan Wakely
C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #19 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-06
14:53:05 UTC ---
Nope, doesn't. I'm going to test and commit a version with the constructor
private. Thanks to both of you! By the way, it would be nice at some point to
actually analyze the assembly
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #18 from Chris Jefferson 2011-12-06
14:41:19 UTC ---
2011-12-06 Chris Jefferson
PR libstdc++/51183
* include/std/tuple (pair::pair): Add two constructors which
use delegating constructors
(pair::__cons, pair::__do_c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #17 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-06
14:40:50 UTC ---
Does the new constructor need to be public?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #16 from Chris Jefferson 2011-12-06
14:25:24 UTC ---
Created attachment 26006
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26006
Piecewise patch
Patch to make piecewise_construct work properly on std::pair.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #15 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-06
10:31:30 UTC ---
Created attachment 26005
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=26005
Tested patch
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #14 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-06
10:30:42 UTC ---
I'm attaching what I already tested and was going to commit. If you like,
please work on top of it and produce a combined new patch. Like, if you think
another testcase is necessary o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #13 from Chris Jefferson 2011-12-06
10:13:56 UTC ---
You can if you like, but if you haven't started yet, I plan on having a patch
ready in about... 2 hours?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|paolo.carlini at oracle dot |
|com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-05
16:27:07 UTC ---
I was assuming that since the public piecewise constructor takes them by value
the extra move would be elided ... that might not be true though.
I haven't written any tests for it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #9 from Chris Jefferson 2011-12-05
16:19:40 UTC ---
The only difference in the version I wrote was that I passed the arguments into
the explicit constructor as non-const references, rather than by value with
std::move, which should be
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #10 from Chris Jefferson 2011-12-05
16:25:13 UTC ---
Oh, and one other tiny detail, I've about given up trying to understand corner
cases in the name look-up rules in C++, so I'd probably std:: qualify those
'get's, just to be on the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini 2011-12-05
16:12:35 UTC ---
I suspected that. Thus, Jon, if you like, just test and commit! ;)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-05
16:09:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> template
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-12-05
16:06:57 UTC ---
Nice!
it should be pretty simple:
template
pair(piecewise_construct_t,
tuple<_Args1...> __first, tuple<_Args2...> __second)
: pair(std::move(__fi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #4 from Marc Glisse 2011-11-17
11:44:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This was necessary because (I believe) it is impossible to implement the
> piecewise_construct_t constructor without compiler support for forwarding
> construc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely 2011-11-17
09:30:41 UTC ---
nope, they haven't
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51183
Chris Jefferson changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||chris at bubblescope dot
22 matches
Mail list logo
