--- Comment #5 from j dot s dot sebastian at gmail dot com 2009-01-20
15:13 ---
It seems with libstdc++ from svn trunk the bug disappears.
Both
__gnu_parallel::sort(v.begin(), v.end());
and
__gnu_parallel::sort(v.begin(), v.end(),std::less());
now compile and run.
At the momen
--- Comment #4 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-01-19 17:36
---
By the way, I don't see any serious divergence between the 4_3 and the mainline
libraries in this area, therefore likely the issue is ultimately due to a C++
front-end issue... Since 4.3.3 is being released rig
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |WAITING
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38897
--- Comment #3 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-01-19 17:17
---
Hummm, actually, I can't reproduce with current mainline... Can you also try a
snapshot / SVN checkout of current mainline?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38897
--- Comment #2 from paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com 2009-01-19 14:05
---
Thanks for the additional info. Let's add Johannes in CC, I'm confident we can
fix this pretty soon.
--
paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
-
--- Comment #1 from j dot s dot sebastian at gmail dot com 2009-01-19
13:50 ---
After some trial and error, I found it does compile (on same system) if I
modify the code as follows, to use the 3-argument version of sort:
#include
#include
int main()
{
std::vector v(100);
// Exp
