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] Apply DR434 resolution to <debug/bitset>


On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 11:23:34AM +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:

> On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 12:10:22PM +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
> 
> > By the way, what happened of that discussion about debug-pedantic vs
> > basic_string? Shall we have a consistent policy about that? In any case,
> > I don't think this is a case where that distinction is important, but if
> > we (meaning, at least, me and you ;) really want zero failures in
> > debug-mode we should start telling apart testcases having to do with
> > details of our implementation from testcases simply enforcing the letter
> > of the standard.
> 
> That's how I noticed that most of the 21_strings tests aren't running on
> my system, I wasn't seeing the element_access/char/empty.cc FAIL on
> mainline, only on 4.0
> 
> A temporary workaround would be to disable the non-const part of the
> tests that fail, but that's just pretending the problem's gone away.
> 
> The ideal solution is to make basic_string's debug check support the v3
> extension that s[s.size()] returns char() for non-const s.

Of course, even if we do this, it would still be nice to distinguish
when we're testing non-standard extensions and implementation details.

jon


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