This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [Patch] Clean up sbumpc, move back _M_buf_size, do not specialcase unbuffered _M_underflow...


>The other case, where it's already open but no I/O has 
>happened yet, is a problem.  We do nothing, then, but the standard says 
>it *must* become unbuffered.  

If opening is considered an io operation, then the behavior, as it
stands, is correct. This is what v2/v3/icc do, and seems reasonable
given the alternative you outline....

>The fact is, we aren't required to care whether I/O has been done.  

Again, see:

27.8.1.4 - Overridden virtual functions

If you think there is a bug in the standard, please file a DR...

>If there's something in a buffer, we are free to discard it.

.... or else this situation is entered. I disagree with your
interpretation here.

-benjamin


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