------- Comment #11 from joaquin at tid dot es 2010-08-12 14:06 ------- > Thanks Manuel.
It's Joaquín :-) You're welcome. > Agreed again. Now I begin to understand this issue ;) Anyway, the > patch for our library is almost ready, already passes all my test. > I'll apply it later today and start working on the even more > serious erase(iterator) issue: during that work I will give more > thinking to this one too, see if we can improve the QoI of > erase(const key_type&) somehow. Let's keep in touch about these issues. Perfect, let's do that. Regarding #579, last I heard from my contact in the committee is that the issue has been finally dismissed and the standard will have an iterator-returning erase(const_iterator). That seems to imply that there exist singly linked lists implementations capable of circumventing the problem, but I haven't seen one yet. Do you have more info (maybe directly from the committee) on this? -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44480
