On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Andrew Sutton
wrote:
> I did find another bug building cmcstl2, hence the attached
> disable-opt patch. For some reason, the memoization of concept
> satisfaction is giving momoized results for concept + args that have
> not yet been evaluated. This is exactly the
On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Andrew Sutton
wrote:
> I just tried building a fresh pull of cmcstl2, and I'm not seeing any
> errors as a result of not handling those missing codes in
> tsubst_constraint. At one point, I think it was not possible to get
> those other constraints in this context
Ah sure. Jason has been vetting my post-Jacksonville concepts patch in
the branch jason/concepts-rewrite. I just pulled this off the github
GCC mirror this morning to look at an outstanding question. Resulted
in the previous 2 patches.
I tried building a fresh pull of your cmcstl2 and got an off-b
I just tried building a fresh pull of cmcstl2, and I'm not seeing any
errors as a result of not handling those missing codes in
tsubst_constraint. At one point, I think it was not possible to get
those other constraints in this context because they were nested in a
parm_constr. But that seems obvio
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 2:25 AM, Andrew Sutton
wrote:
>> > I've run into some trouble building cmcstl2: declarator requirements
>> > on a function can lead to constraints that tsubst_constraint doesn't
>> > handle. What was your theory of only handling a few _CONSTR codes
>> > there? This is blo
I've pushed my work-in-progress integration branch to jason/concepts-rewrite.
Jason
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 1:33 AM, Andrew Sutton
> wrote:
>> I'll just leave this here...
>>
>> This patch significantly improves performance with concepts
On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 1:33 AM, Andrew Sutton
wrote:
> I'll just leave this here...
>
> This patch significantly improves performance with concepts (i.e.,
> makes it actually usable for real systems) and improves the
> specificity of diagnostics when constraints fail.
>
> Unfortunately, this isn'
