https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|9.0 |7.4
--- Comment #13 from Jonathan
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Jul 4 13:59:42 2018
New Revision: 262411
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262411=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/86127 avoid unnecessary allocator conversions
There is no need to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
--- Comment #11 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Jul 4 11:46:43 2018
New Revision: 262393
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262393=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/86127 avoid unnecessary allocator conversions
There is no need to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely ---
As I said in comment 6, I've already removed the copies that forward_list does
on destruction.
As I said in comment 3, there are no copies in the default constructor, they're
in the initializer-list
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
--- Comment #9 from Scott Constable ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #8)
> (In reply to Scott Constable from comment #7)
> > (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> > > The allocator requirements say that move construction
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Scott Constable from comment #7)
> (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> > The allocator requirements say that move construction must be equivalent to
> > copy construction, and
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
--- Comment #7 from Scott Constable ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #1)
> The allocator requirements say that move construction must be equivalent to
> copy construction, and allocators should be cheap to copy anyway. I don't
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Author: redi
Date: Wed Jun 13 15:14:48 2018
New Revision: 261554
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=261554=gcc=rev
Log:
PR libstdc++/86127 avoid unnecessary allocator conversions
There is no need to
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #2)
> Also your test is flawed.
>
> (In reply to Scott Constable from comment #0)
> > forward_list test
> > ==
>
> These all come from the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86127
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely ---
The allocator requirements say that move construction must be equivalent to
copy construction, and allocators should be cheap to copy anyway. I don't
consider this a bug.
13 matches
Mail list logo
