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 to valarray

From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu>
To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
Cc: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, Pierre Chanial <p dot chanial at imperial dot ac dot uk>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 18:58:43 -0500
Subject: Re: PATCH to valarray
References: <87mzhd1ec5.fsf@soliton.cs.tamu.edu> <36de2bded9cc36c33af6e2c1c76cfb45@physics.uc.edu> <m3fyn59sk2.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net>

On Jan 30, 2006, at 6:58 PM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:

Andrew Pinski <pinskia@physics.uc.edu> writes:

| we should be more careful at what we say should go into 4.1.0.
I have not applied the patch yet to libstdc++ in 4.1.0.
The issue being considered are of efficiency concern for some GNU
projects (e.g. GDL),
Have you unconvered a bug in the patch?


This was in general, and not towards you or your patch.
I am just more concerned that GCC 4.1.0 will be delayed because
a patch which did not fix a regression, caused a regression.

This is the same concern I have with the 128bit long double patch.

-- Pinski

References:
- PATCH to valarray
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: PATCH to valarray
  - From: Andrew Pinski
- Re: PATCH to valarray
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis

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