This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: libstdc++ and race detectors
- From: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>
- To: Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google dot com>
- Cc: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>, libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, Julian Seward <jseward at acm dot org>, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche at acm dot org>, "Frank, Matthew I" <matthew dot i dot frank at intel dot com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 12:36:34 +0200
- Subject: Re: libstdc++ and race detectors
- References: <AANLkTim68MweWz6dJkpl4t2Ub6EIlhpgPYas_Gc1WurR@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTilT6PA-OTUllfBahHwCoxMYT_Z19kQNk6yGvaG_@mail.gmail.com> <4C3C5BF8.2050805@oracle.com> <AANLkTikNmQ7jpetsnO5KOgD2LQmglLU8X67Gwr8twW1w@mail.gmail.com> <4C3C79B0.4070703@oracle.com> <AANLkTinWYzsa0wZMoAvXGgFt6emEtVhooRONYbKCx_C9@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinguZkC2Itigx3CpG2tuRhkoRSPvBZ9GeYWOGKD@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimKWPH1F9TpauoYYAYq-KtVRn565uNkF3p9InCh@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikO34M61MUuOziCfuzAGUYvEwNeybq9ulCvNOxB@mail.gmail.com> <4C3D8A35.60302@oracle.com> <AANLkTilTEp-YkjwTsuvj9UXY9cx168_OJAHQBe0i7n49@mail.gmail.com> <4C3D9A7B.2010107@oracle.com> <AANLkTimyphRPCwv1UPngm1JcAH7CKlXoi7N5Wpix6zVF@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimaZI6NhN2ymB3fdkZI8YLDsJ8BUWD8k-RFjQLk@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTil1nRjJzryXCRhyJfX8jTEHH948app2csV5wqLd@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikJ_V3ggetht4TrdP46BW402i3pL6PW98kXuRKH@mail.gmail.com> <4C6279B0.! 3070407@oracle.com> <AANLkTikTd0BER3rqaYPoJ6pz47GE5rSDrH7s9Bw=jvmT@mail.gmail.com>
On 08/11/2010 12:23 PM, Kostya Serebryany wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> ... by the way, why are you touching only those two headers? Didn't we
>> agree to change consistently all the occurrences of
>>
> We did agree on that, I just wanted to have the first patch to be
> simpler and cover only a few files.
> Shall I add everything into one patch?
>
Oh yes, the changes are mechanical, isn't that we have yet to decide
whether we want to do this kind of change or not, basing on testing or
something similar. Well, it's true that without a Copyright assignment
(right? Or you are covered by Google?) we are on risky grounds, but if
you can keep the patch otherwise as simple as possible, we can still
make it this time. And yes, maybe better taking out from the comment the
documentation bits and opening a PR as a reminder to ourselves.
Paolo.