--- Comment #17 from igaztanaga at gmail dot com 2008-07-23 08:03 ---
Andrew, I think I do write some crappy code, but the slowdown is also present
in the non-optimized version.
FWIW, there are STL implementations that embed the color bit in rbtrees in the
parent pointer so the optimiza
--- Comment #15 from lothar at tradescape dot biz 2008-07-22 22:01 ---
What I am worried about is that if it is not marked as a regression nobody
cares to fix it although it breaks a real application that works with gcc
4.3.2.
If you have any insights how to improve the boost intrusive
--- Comment #14 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-22 21:52
---
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> From an application perspective it is still a regression, as it works happily
> with gcc 4.2.3
Yes but it is boost's fault that boost tries to be smart about
--- Comment #13 from lothar at tradescape dot biz 2008-07-22 21:48 ---
(In reply to comment #11)
>From an application perspective it is still a regression, as it works happily
with gcc 4.2.3
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36861
--- Comment #11 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-07-22 21:43
---
I think someone needs to kick the hell out of boost for making crappy code. I
am going to remove the regression marker for now because it is definitely a bit
weird what boost is doing and not normal for real code.
