On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 2:20 PM Luc Grosheintz
wrote:
>
>
> On 5/26/25 13:53, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
> > On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 1:32 PM Luc Grosheintz >
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 5/26/25 11:43, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
> >>> On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 11:35 AM Luc Grosheintz <
> >> luc.groshe
On 5/26/25 13:53, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 1:32 PM Luc Grosheintz
wrote:
On 5/26/25 11:43, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 11:35 AM Luc Grosheintz <
luc.groshei...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On 5/22/25 15:21, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
For the stride and p
On 5/26/25 11:43, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 11:35 AM Luc Grosheintz
wrote:
On 5/22/25 15:21, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
For the stride and product computation, we should perform them in
Extent::size_type, not index_type.
The latter may be signed, and we may hit UB in mu
On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 1:32 PM Luc Grosheintz
wrote:
>
>
> On 5/26/25 11:43, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
> > On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 11:35 AM Luc Grosheintz <
> luc.groshei...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 5/22/25 15:21, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
> >>>
> >>> For the stride and product comp
On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 11:35 AM Luc Grosheintz
wrote:
>
>
> On 5/22/25 15:21, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
> >
> > For the stride and product computation, we should perform them in
> > Extent::size_type, not index_type.
> > The latter may be signed, and we may hit UB in multiplying non-zero
> > extent
On 5/22/25 15:21, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
For the stride and product computation, we should perform them in
Extent::size_type, not index_type.
The latter may be signed, and we may hit UB in multiplying non-zero
extents, before reaching the zero.
Then I observe the following issues:
1. When
On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 5:25 PM Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 4:22 PM Luc Grosheintz
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 5/22/25 15:21, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
>> > Thanks for working on the patches, they look solid, comments.
>> >
>> > Could you prepare a separate patch to fix initiali
On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 4:22 PM Luc Grosheintz
wrote:
>
>
> On 5/22/25 15:21, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
> > Thanks for working on the patches, they look solid, comments.
> >
> > Could you prepare a separate patch to fix initialization
> > default-initialization of extents,
> > that you have noticed,
On 5/22/25 15:21, Tomasz Kaminski wrote:
Thanks for working on the patches, they look solid, comments.
Could you prepare a separate patch to fix initialization
default-initialization of extents,
that you have noticed, standard requires them to be value-initialized, and
add corresponding test?
Thanks for working on the patches, they look solid, comments.
Could you prepare a separate patch to fix initialization
default-initialization of extents,
that you have noticed, standard requires them to be value-initialized, and
add corresponding test?
Similarly, we have test for default construc
On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 4:21 PM Luc Grosheintz
wrote:
> It's missing the "registration" of the three new classes in
> std.cc.in.
>
Please remember to add it in next revisions.
>
> On 5/21/25 11:40, Luc Grosheintz wrote:
> > Follows up on:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2025-May/0615
It's missing the "registration" of the three new classes in
std.cc.in.
On 5/21/25 11:40, Luc Grosheintz wrote:
Follows up on:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2025-May/061535.html
To improve naming conventions, this series includes three new commits:
* Two commits to rename _ExtentsS
Follows up on:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2025-May/061535.html
To improve naming conventions, this series includes three new commits:
* Two commits to rename _ExtentsStorage::_M_dynamic_extents, and
extents::_M_dynamic_extents.
* One commit to cleanup whitespace errors in ext
13 matches
Mail list logo
