On 16/06/16 21:29 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
Here is a new version compiling all your feedbacks.
PR libstdc++/71181
* include/tr1/hashtable_policy.h
(_Prime_rehash_policy::_M_next_bkt): Make past-the-end iterator
dereferenceable to avoid check on lower_bound result.
(_Prime_reh
Here is a new version compiling all your feedbacks.
PR libstdc++/71181
* include/tr1/hashtable_policy.h
(_Prime_rehash_policy::_M_next_bkt): Make past-the-end iterator
dereferenceable to avoid check on lower_bound result.
(_Prime_rehash_policy::_M_bkt_for_elements): Call latte
On 14/06/16 22:34 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
On 14/06/2016 13:22, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 13/06/16 21:49 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
I eventually would like to propose the attached patch.
In tr1 I made sure we use a special past-the-end iterator that
makes usage of lower_bound
On 14/06/2016 13:22, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 13/06/16 21:49 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
I eventually would like to propose the attached patch.
In tr1 I made sure we use a special past-the-end iterator that
makes usage of lower_bound result without check safe.
I'm confused ... i
diff --git
a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/unordered_set/hash_policy/71181.cc
b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/unordered_set/hash_policy/71181.cc
new file mode 100644
index 000..e0c0259
--- /dev/null
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/unordered_set/hash_policy/71181.cc
@
On 13/06/16 21:49 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
I eventually would like to propose the attached patch.
In tr1 I made sure we use a special past-the-end iterator that
makes usage of lower_bound result without check safe.
I'm confused ... isn't that already done?
_S_n_primes is defin
Hi
I eventually would like to propose the attached patch.
In tr1 I made sure we use a special past-the-end iterator that
makes usage of lower_bound result without check safe.
PR libstdc++/71181
* include/tr1/hashtable_policy.h
(_Prime_rehash_policy::_M_next_bkt): Make past
On 25/05/2016 16:01, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 22/05/16 17:16 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
To fix 71181 problem I propose to change how we deal with reserve
called with pivot values that is to say prime numbers. Now
_M_next_bkt always return a value higher than the input value. This
w
On 22/05/16 17:16 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
To fix 71181 problem I propose to change how we deal with reserve
called with pivot values that is to say prime numbers. Now _M_next_bkt
always return a value higher than the input value. This way when
reverse(97) is called we end up with
