This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [v3] Add hash<shared_ptr> and hash<unique_ptr>
- From: Paolo Carlini <paolo dot carlini at oracle dot com>
- To: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, libstdc++ <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 18:16:06 +0200
- Subject: Re: [v3] Add hash<shared_ptr> and hash<unique_ptr>
- References: <4C125D99.4090109@oracle.com> <AANLkTikcIm66mJGzxxXyz-EB4EjDUERHqJ23w4_8fmcg@mail.gmail.com>
On 06/11/2010 06:06 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> Does our tuple benefit from the EBO if the deleter is empty?
>
You are right, I think it does now (it didn't at first) and that's a big
advantage of tuple over pair. We should use a compressed_pair, really...
We even had it contributed, at some point, quite similar to the boost
version, I think. Would it be *much* simpler than <tuple>? Probably not
worth the trouble and breaking the "experimental ABI"...
Anyway, I can work immediately on changing <memory> to not include the
whole <functional>, even if <tuple> remains.
Paolo.