Re: Debug functions review

2013-10-25 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi, On 10/24/2013 09:22 PM, François Dumont wrote: Ok to commit ? Looks great to me. Thanks! Paolo.

Re: Debug functions review

2013-10-24 Thread François Dumont
On 10/24/2013 12:12 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: On 10/23/2013 11:22 PM, François Dumont wrote: You are right, I am preparing a test case. However you have to know that __check_dereferenceable is simply not used for the moment. It is only because I have started using it for a debug mode evolution

Re: Debug functions review

2013-10-23 Thread François Dumont
On 10/23/2013 12:37 AM, Paolo Carlini wrote: Hi, François Dumont frs.dum...@gmail.com ha scritto: Hi Here is a patch to clean up a little some debug functions. I got rid of the __check_singular_aux, simply playing with __check_singular overloads was enough. I also added the missing

Re: Debug functions review

2013-10-23 Thread Paolo Carlini
On 10/23/2013 11:22 PM, François Dumont wrote: You are right, I am preparing a test case. However you have to know that __check_dereferenceable is simply not used for the moment. It is only because I have started using it for a debug mode evolution that I discovered the issue. Ok, thanks. Now

Debug functions review

2013-10-22 Thread François Dumont
Hi Here is a patch to clean up a little some debug functions. I got rid of the __check_singular_aux, simply playing with __check_singular overloads was enough. I also added the missing __check_dereferenceable for safe local iterators. 2013-10-22 François Dumont fdum...@gcc.gnu.org

Re: Debug functions review

2013-10-22 Thread Paolo Carlini
Hi, François Dumont frs.dum...@gmail.com ha scritto: Hi Here is a patch to clean up a little some debug functions. I got rid of the __check_singular_aux, simply playing with __check_singular overloads was enough. I also added the missing __check_dereferenceable for safe local iterators.