This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [patch] C++14: N3671 Making non-modifying sequence operations more robust
- From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: François Dumont <frs dot dumont at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "libstdc++" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 10:34:22 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patch] C++14: N3671 Making non-modifying sequence operations more robust
- References: <CAH6eHdQWhZjPJczqLT+jYs16RuokiqezVJcia_5up6e1KbevBg at mail dot gmail dot com> <51B6342A dot 5090407 at gmail dot com> <CAH6eHdRH9sgjpyzh0Yxk3oxT6zOhFGW5cEhq80nU6GYLzXLu1g at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 11 June 2013 00:09, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely.gcc@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10 June 2013 21:16, François Dumont wrote:
>>
>> But I am not sure it is the intended behavior because I can't see where
>> those equal overloads are used. It looks like __equal2 has been implemented
>> and used instead. Maybe some dead code to clean, no ?
>
> It should be used, I'll check it.
You're right, it's just dead code, I added overloads to __equal, then
added __equal2 instead and forgot to remove those overloads.
__equal2::equal() checks the lengths correctly, so I just need to
clean up the dead code.