Re: [patch] libstdc++/66055 add missing constructors to unordered containers

[Jonathan Wakely <jwakely at redhat dot com>]

On 16/05/15 11:39 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
> On 14/05/2015 15:47, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > Reported by Nathan and fixed by his patch. I added the tests.
> >
> > Tested powerpc64le-linux, committed to trunk. This should be
> > backported too.
>
> While backporting to debug and profile mode I noticed that those 
> constructors were not the only missing ones. So here is a patch to 
> complete them with debug and profile modes.

Great, thanks.

> @@ -233,6 +222,41 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER
> 	: _M_h(__l, __n, __hf, __eql, __a)
>       { }
>
> +      unordered_map(size_type __n, const allocator_type& __a)
> +      : unordered_map(__n, hasher(), key_equal(), __a)
> +      { }
> +
> +      unordered_map(size_type __n, const hasher& __hf,
> +		    const allocator_type& __a)
> +      : unordered_map(__n, __hf, key_equal(), __a)
> +      { }
> +
> +      template<typename _InputIterator>
> +	unordered_map(_InputIterator __first, _InputIterator __last,
> +		      size_type __n,
> +		      const allocator_type& __a)
> +	  : unordered_map(__first, __last, __n, hasher(), key_equal(), __a)

The indentation is inconsistent here, the ctor-initializer-list is
indented further than necessary

> @@ -891,7 +941,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_CONTAINER
>        *  in the initializer list @a __l.
>        *
>        *  Note that the assignment completely changes the %unordered_multiset
> -       *  and that the resulting %unordered_set's size is the same as the number
> +       *  and that the resulting %unordered_multiset's size is the same as the number
>        *  of elements assigned.  Old data may be lost.

Please reformat this to stay below 80 columns.

OK with those two tiny adjustments, thanks!