This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ 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]

Re: safe unordered local iterators


Hi,
Yes, if it's possible for users to invalidate and misuse those iterators then it's a good idea to have debug mode checks.
Indeed. But my rough feeling would be that such misuses are much less frequent and relevant than the other, with normal iterators. Francois, can you provide a breakdown about the cost of tracking those local iterators too? In terms of memory use, maybe performance too? We could even imagine tracking those only in pedantic-mode or when an additional macro is set, in case.

By the way, talking about fixing the ABI, etc, we have definitely at least a serious issue to resolve in the normal-mode unordered containers, that is LWG 579 (aka libstdc++/41975), it's in my to do list for 4.7.0, I'm not sure whether something will change in the details of the local iterators which would impact the debug-mode version too..

Paolo.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]