Re: [RFC] parallel/tree.h?

[Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>]

Hi,
>> It would be great. Because, otherwise, I don't think we should deliver
>> tree.h, in 4.3.0 at least, it's totally undocumented and unused
>> elsewhere (by the way, booted and tested without it, to be sure)
>>     
> Well, it is used for parallel bulk insertion into std::(multi)set/map.
> But you are right, currently, the code is not activated, the bindings
> got lost during the integration. However, we are working on a version
> that uses the code, and we have already fixed some of the compliance
> issues in there.
>
> We should reconsider this whole thing after we have the improved the
> code.
Ok, many thanks for the clarification. Therefore, for now, better
removing it, I think there are no problems with adding it back the final
version of it.

In the meanwhile, I tried to understand a bit myself whether we could
keep it for 4.3.0, by adding some minimal documentation, to allow the
users experimenting with it, as a replacement parallel version of
_Rb_tree. The problem is that, as-is, <parallel/tree.h> doesn't compile;
moreover, as already noticed, huge functions would have to be split or
moved out of line and, more importantly, the user interface is not the
same of the normal _Rb_tree, therefore cannot be a drop-in replacement
anyway...

Anyway, many, many, thanks for your continuing effort in this area,
Benjamin followed it much more closely, but I also appreciate it, and
look forward to the improvements that you mentioned in the reply!

Paolo.