This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC 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] | |
Thanks, pushed to trunk and 6.2. Jason On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Andrew Sutton <andrew.n.sutton@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't. I rebuilt with the recent push and used it build my recent > projects. Not seeing any problems. > > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 5:26 PM Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Andrew Sutton >> <andrew.n.sutton@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I did find another bug building cmcstl2, hence the attached >> > disable-opt patch. For some reason, the memoization of concept >> > satisfaction is giving momoized results for concept + args that have >> > not yet been evaluated. This is exactly the same problem that made me >> > disable the lookup/memoize_constraint_sat optimizations. Somehow I'm >> > getting the same hash code for different arguments, and they also >> > happen to compare equal. >> >> This bug turned out to be e.g. substituting int into "requires >> C<typename T::foo>", which fails because int has no foo member, and >> therefore deciding that C<int> is false. >> >> After I fixed that, I tried turning on the constraint memos, which >> didn't seem to break anything. >> >> I've pushed to the jason/concepts-rewrite branch again. See any >> reason I shouldn't merge to trunk now? >> >> Jason > > -- > Andrew Sutton
Attachment:
concepts-rewrite.diff
Description: Text document
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |