This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: libstdc++ test suite still drives machine into swap

On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 08:26:15PM -0400, Stephen M. Webb wrote:
> I noticed while I was trying to write some fairly comprehensive test
> suites that all the containers simply return size_type(-1) for max_size. 
> That's incorrect for a number of reasons, least of which is that's not the
> behaviour mandated by the standard,

Have you looked at LWG issue 197?  Looks like they're going to specify
max_size for an allocator as something different than max_size for
a container, which is probably smart.  But for the first case, where
it represents "the biggest size that could be meaningfully passed to
allocate()," #197 notes that the LWG believes the intended meaning to be
"as much memory as your platform could conceivably have."

And arguably size_type(-1) is a fair representation of that amount of memory.
Something in me wants to see a more user-controlled value, but whatever.

> I though the first order of business before proposing such a change was to
> develop a comprehensive regression and conformance test suite, one that
> runs without killing my machine.  That's where what you were talking about
> came in.

For now I'm no longer running the dejagnu testsuite.  I'm using the mkcheck
script instead, and charting the number of unexpected failures.  (Well,
number of failures minus the number of *.cc files containing the word


Would I had phrases that are not known, utterances that are strange, in
new language that has not been used, free from repetition, not an utterance
which has grown stale, which men of old have spoken.
                                     - anonymous Egyptian scribe, c.1700 BC

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]