On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Paolo Carlini
wrote:
> Thanks. I added a few words to 57513 too. It would be nice to figure out
> which specific change fixed the link-time issue (provided a definition for
> the default constructor?)
Comment added.
--
Tim Shen
On 07/24/2013 05:18 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Should I register a new bugzilla account to comment on these two
bugs(53622 and 57173), or any other one will do this?
I've added a comment to the bugs.
With svn commit rights you should be able to receive email at @gcc.gnu.org and if you use that a
On 24 July 2013 15:50, Tim Shen wrote:
>
> Committed.
Thanks!
> Should I register a new bugzilla account to comment on these two
> bugs(53622 and 57173), or any other one will do this?
I've added a comment to the bugs.
With svn commit rights you should be able to receive email at @gcc.gnu.org a
On 07/24/2013 04:50 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
Then we should also add something (by hand, unfortunately, as I explained)
to the audit trails of those bugs, because we want the original submitters
to double check the fixes with their own code, get
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> Then we should also add something (by hand, unfortunately, as I explained)
> to the audit trails of those bugs, because we want the original submitters
> to double check the fixes with their own code, get as much feedback as
> possible while
On 07/23/2013 05:31 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
Revised version, with _M_dfs_* moved to the class definition, PR
testcases, and some comments on _M_dfs().
I nobody has further comments, I think this is Ok to go in now. Let's
make sure we don't forget the various comments about optimization,
pre-scannin
Revised version, with _M_dfs_* moved to the class definition, PR
testcases, and some comments on _M_dfs().
Thanks.
--
Tim Shen
dfs-matcher.patch
Description: Binary data
Hi,
>Is this naive or not?
I don't know. For sure we don't want inline code in *.tcc headers.
Paolo
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> This doesn't make much sense to me: if the functions are inside a *.tcc file
> why are marked inline? First blush seem indeed good candidates for inline,
> but then should be in the *.h
My view is like this :
When I put something into the cl
.. not that, in general, *all* the testcases coming from a bug report
in Bugzilla, should either be named after the bug # or have the
information in a comment inside (or both, as I said already)
Paolo.
On 07/23/2013 03:07 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
+ inline
+ bool _Grep_matcher::
+ _M_dfs_match()
+ { return _M_dfs(_M_nfa->_M_start()); }
+
+ inline
+ bool _Grep_matcher::
+ _M_dfs_search_from_first()
+ { return _M_dfs(_M_nfa->_M_start()); }
This doesn't make much sense to me: if the functions ar
Hi,
On 07/23/2013 03:07 PM, Tim Shen wrote:
At last, two bug reports(libstdc++/53622 and libstdc++/57173) said
that there're regex grouping problems. It's relatively simple fix it
in the DFS approach, and I added them to the testsuite. Shall I write
PR in the ChangeLog? What does PR stand for?
P
This is the most exciting patch from me so far! XD
Here I temporarily shadow the Thompson NFA matcher[1](original
_Grep_matcher), and use the Depth-First Search(DFS, or backtracking)
approach instead.
Yes, DFS is *exponentially slow* :( However we need it, because when
encountering the feature "b
13 matches
Mail list logo
