[Bug libstdc++/112453] : __take_of_repeat_view/__drop_of_repeat_view should forwards __r._M_value

2024-05-21 Thread jakub at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112453

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|13.3|13.4

--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
GCC 13.3 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 13.4.

[Bug libstdc++/112453] : __take_of_repeat_view/__drop_of_repeat_view should forwards __r._M_value

2023-11-09 Thread cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112453

--- Comment #2 from CVS Commits  ---
The master branch has been updated by Patrick Palka :

https://gcc.gnu.org/g:d63282fa5b587f1b994210212f236b998a332995

commit r14-5297-gd63282fa5b587f1b994210212f236b998a332995
Author: Patrick Palka 
Date:   Thu Nov 9 15:15:08 2023 -0500

libstdc++: Fix forwarding in __take/drop_of_repeat_view [PR112453]

We need to respect the value category of the repeat_view passed to these
two functions when accessing the view's _M_value member.  This revealed
that the space-efficient partial specialization of __box lacks && overloads
of operator* to match those of the primary template (inherited from
std::optional).

PR libstdc++/112453

libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:

* include/std/ranges (__detail::__box<_Tp>::operator*): Define
&& overloads as well.
(__detail::__take_of_repeat_view): Forward __r when accessing
its _M_value member.
(__detail::__drop_of_repeat_view): Likewise.
* testsuite/std/ranges/repeat/1.cc (test07): New test.

Reviewed-by: Jonathan Wakely 

[Bug libstdc++/112453] : __take_of_repeat_view/__drop_of_repeat_view should forwards __r._M_value

2023-11-09 Thread ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org via Gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112453

Patrick Palka  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Target Milestone|--- |13.3
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
   Last reconfirmed||2023-11-09
   Keywords||rejects-valid
 Ever confirmed|0   |1
   Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org  |ppalka at gcc dot 
gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from Patrick Palka  ---
Confirmed, thanks for catching and reporting this.