++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: holger.seelig at yahoo dot de
Target Milestone: ---
std::regex crashes when matching long lines.
Here is an example:
#include
#include
int main()
{
std::string s (100'000, '*');
std::smatch m;
std::regex r
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: holger.seelig at yahoo dot de
Target Milestone: ---
std::regex crashes when matching long lines.
Here is an example:
#include
#include
int main()
{
std::string s (100'000, '*');
std::smatch m;
std::regex r
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: holger.seelig at yahoo dot de
Target Milestone: ---
std::regex crashes when matching long lines.
Here is an example:
#include
#include
int main()
{
std::string s (100'000, '*');
std::smatch m;
std::regex r
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77858
--- Comment #3 from Holger Seelig ---
Thanks for your response I have looked into c++config.h and figured out that
__glibcxx_assert depends on the definition of_GLIBCXX_PARALLEL, that I have
defined. Probably better for me not to use this
: c++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: holger.seelig at yahoo dot de
Target Milestone: ---
I think it is not right to throw an exception if rho is negative. The result is
well defined for polar representation if rho is negative if polar is something
like
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61621
--- Comment #2 from Holger Seelig holger.seelig at yahoo dot de ---
To my understanding and what I know is that a switch like the following:
switch (i)
{
case 10:
func_a();
break;
case 11:
func_b();
break;
case
++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: holger.seelig at yahoo dot de
I detected that a normal enum switch is 1.5 up to 3 times slower than a
'double' enum switch. Below I created a test case for you. Unkomment the marked
lines to get better performace results
