On 07/12/2023 14:41, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 20:55, François Dumont wrote:
I think I still got no feedback about this cleanup proposal.
Can you remind me why we have all those different functions in
predefined_ops.h in the first place? I think it was to avoid having
two
On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 at 13:41, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 20:55, François Dumont wrote:
> >
> > I think I still got no feedback about this cleanup proposal.
>
> Can you remind me why we have all those different functions in
> predefined_ops.h in the first place? I think it
On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 20:55, François Dumont wrote:
>
> I think I still got no feedback about this cleanup proposal.
Can you remind me why we have all those different functions in
predefined_ops.h in the first place? I think it was to avoid having
two versions of every algorithm, one that does
I think I still got no feedback about this cleanup proposal.
Here is a new version.
François
On 15/06/2023 07:07, François Dumont wrote:
I think we all agree that __gnu_cxx::__ops needed to be reimplemented,
here it is.
Note that I kept the usage of std::ref in , and .
libstdc++:
I think we all agree that __gnu_cxx::__ops needed to be reimplemented,
here it is.
Note that I kept the usage of std::ref in , and .
libstdc++: Reimplement __gnu_cxx::__ops operators
Replace functors using iterators as input to adopt functors that
are matching the same Standard
