On Saturday 14 November 2020 at 00:17:22 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 13/11/20 22:45 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On 13/11/20 21:12 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > On 13/11/20 20:29 +, Mike Crowe via Libstdc++ wrote:
> > > > On Friday 13 November 2020 at 17:25:22 +, Jonathan
On 13/11/20 22:45 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 13/11/20 21:12 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 13/11/20 20:29 +, Mike Crowe via Libstdc++ wrote:
On Friday 13 November 2020 at 17:25:22 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
+ // Return the relative duration from (now_s + now_ns) to (abs_s + abs
On 13/11/20 21:12 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 13/11/20 20:29 +, Mike Crowe via Libstdc++ wrote:
On Friday 13 November 2020 at 17:25:22 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
+ // Return the relative duration from (now_s + now_ns) to (abs_s + abs_ns)
+ // as a timespec.
+ struct timespec
+ r
On 13/11/20 21:12 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 13/11/20 20:29 +, Mike Crowe via Libstdc++ wrote:
On Friday 13 November 2020 at 17:25:22 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
+ // Return the relative duration from (now_s + now_ns) to (abs_s + abs_ns)
+ // as a timespec.
+ struct timespec
+ r
On 13/11/20 20:29 +, Mike Crowe via Libstdc++ wrote:
On Friday 13 November 2020 at 17:25:22 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
+ // Return the relative duration from (now_s + now_ns) to (abs_s + abs_ns)
+ // as a timespec.
+ struct timespec
+ relative_timespec(chrono::seconds abs_s, chrono::n
On Friday 13 November 2020 at 17:25:22 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 13/11/20 11:02 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On 12/11/20 23:49 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > To poll a std::future to see if it's ready you have to call one of the
> > > timed waiting functions. The most obvious way
>Backporting the change to gcc-10 revealed an overflow bug in the
>existing code, resulting in blocking for years when given an absolute
>timeout in the distant past. There's still a similar bug in the new
>code (using futexes with absolute timeouts against clocks) where a
>large chrono::seconds va
On 13/11/20 11:02 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 12/11/20 23:49 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
To poll a std::future to see if it's ready you have to call one of the
timed waiting functions. The most obvious way is wait_for(0s) but this
was previously very inefficient because it would turn the
On 12/11/20 23:49 +, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
To poll a std::future to see if it's ready you have to call one of the
timed waiting functions. The most obvious way is wait_for(0s) but this
was previously very inefficient because it would turn the relative
timeout to an absolute one by calling sy
To poll a std::future to see if it's ready you have to call one of the
timed waiting functions. The most obvious way is wait_for(0s) but this
was previously very inefficient because it would turn the relative
timeout to an absolute one by calling system_clock::now(). When the
relative timeout is ze
10 matches
Mail list logo
