[Bug libstdc++/114316] assert failure with _GLIBCXX_DEBUG and empty range of singular iterators passed to std:: algorithm

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114316 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug libstdc++/90276] PSTL tests fail in Debug Mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90276 --- Comment #2 from François Dumont --- Is there any unmentioned prerequisite to reproduce this bug ? I cannot. Maybe thanks to PR11477 this PR could be closed too.

[Bug libstdc++/112477] [13/14 Regression] Assignment of value-initialized iterators differs from value-initialization

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=112477 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/83077] sso-string @ gnu-versioned-namespace.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077 --- Comment #20 from François Dumont --- I run make check-c++ before and after my patch and I see no regression. I even have less failures with the patch even if I haven't check yet why. So I think the patch is quite safe, just waiting for

[Bug c++/111524] New: Missing support for inline namespace in spellcheck

Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone: --- When spellcheck is trying to find out what mistake the dev made inline namespace are not considered. To reproduce you just need to build g++/libstdc++ with: --enable

[Bug libstdc++/83077] sso-string @ gnu-versioned-namespace.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077 --- Comment #17 from François Dumont --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #15) > > many of the c++ fails are of this form: > > contracts-tmpl-spec1.C:(.text+0x6f): undefined reference to >

[Bug libstdc++/83077] sso-string @ gnu-versioned-namespace.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077 --- Comment #14 from François Dumont --- Good news then. On my side I only had some failures due to a faulty friend declaration in gnu-versioned-namespace mode in for which I've submitted a patch:

[Bug libstdc++/111050] [11/12/13/14 Regression] ABI break in _Hash_node_value_base since GCC 11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111050 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/83077] sso-string @ gnu-versioned-namespace.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077 --- Comment #10 from François Dumont --- This is because you are facing the PR65762 issue. I just attached a path proposal to it that you need to apply too to be able to run your test. You'll be even able to simply use

[Bug libstdc++/65762] --with-default-libstdcxx-abi=c++11 is silently ignored when --disable-libstdcxx-dual-abi is used

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65762 --- Comment #3 from François Dumont --- Created attachment 55834 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=55834=edit Patch proposal Here is a proposal that I'll submit on libstdc++ mailing list once PR83077 is fixed. Note that in

[Bug libstdc++/111050] [11/12/13/14 Regression] ABI break in _Hash_node_value_base since GCC 11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111050 --- Comment #3 from François Dumont --- For sure _Hash_node layout didn't change, that's why I couldn't think of any abi issue here. I see that you already had the solution ! It was some kind of test then, I failed :-). Did you try it ? If

[Bug libstdc++/83077] sso-string @ gnu-versioned-namespace.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077 --- Comment #7 from François Dumont --- Sure, if you follow the email thread you'll see my latest patch: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2023-August/628399.html

[Bug libstdc++/111050] [11/12/13/14 Regression] ABI break in _Hash_node_value_base since GCC 11

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111050 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/91263] unordered_map and unordered_set operator== double key comparison causes exponential behavior

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91263 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/107189] Inconsistent range insertion implementations in std::_Rb_tree in

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107189 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|ASSIGNED

[Bug libstdc++/103621] stable_sort could call std::__merge_sort_with_buffer directly in typical case

|RESOLVED CC||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #1 from François Dumont --- I think it has been fixed by: commit 63d182fb86e47323ac50d9368845d712e1f7da89 Author: François Dumont

[Bug libstdc++/107189] Inconsistent range insertion implementations in std::_Rb_tree in

|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 CC||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from François Dumont --- Code looks

[Bug libstdc++/105717] [10/11/12/13 Regression] cannot create unordered_map from range of types convertible to value_type

|13.0 CC||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |FIXED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from François Dumont --- libstdc

[Bug libstdc++/96088] Range insertion into unordered_map is less effective than a loop with insertion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96088 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |12.0 Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/99402] [10 Regression] std::copy creates _GLIBCXX_DEBUG false positive for attempt to subscript a dereferenceable (start-of-sequence) iterator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99402 --- Comment #13 from François Dumont --- Fixed on gcc-10 branch by this commit https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=commit;h=ab83ce42ea0b2fbc09d51b7bd5e69905dcaa2041.

[Bug libstdc++/99402] [10/11 Regression] std::copy creates _GLIBCXX_DEBUG false positive for attempt to subscript a dereferenceable (start-of-sequence) iterator

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99402 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/95079] unorderd_map::insert_or_assign and try_emplace should only hash and mod once unless there is a rehash.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95079 --- Comment #6 from François Dumont --- Thanks for the feedback. If this is still a problem for you after this enhancement you should perhaps try the _Power2_rehash_policy provided as an extension. In

[Bug libstdc++/83077] sso-string @ gnu-versioned-namespace.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83077 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/95079] unorderd_map::insert_or_assign and try_emplace should only hash and mod once unless there is a rehash.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95079 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/98466] Debug Mode iterators for unordered containers do not implement N3644

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98466 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |11.0 Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/70303] Value-initialized debug iterators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70303 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|NEW

[Bug libstdc++/70303] Value-initialized debug iterators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70303 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/98466] Debug Mode iterators for unordered containers do not implement N3644

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98466 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/83938] Speed up inplace_merge() algorithm & fix inefficient logic

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83938 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/91620] std::[forward_]list::remove_if/unique should respect to DR 526

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91620 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/96088] Range insertion into unordered_map is less effective than a loop with insertion

|1 Last reconfirmed||2020-08-04 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #5 from François Dumont --- After further investigation the unordered containers are also suffering from a problem

[Bug libstdc++/96088] Range insertion into unordered_map is less effective than a loop with insertion

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=96088 --- Comment #1 from François Dumont --- The core issue here is that unordered_map key type is std::string while you insert const char* which explains the temporary. In f2 you use insert(Pair&&) method so a temporary is generated but then moved

[Bug libstdc++/90409] std::move[_backward] could be more optimized for deque iterators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90409 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Target Milestone|---

[Bug libstdc++/95079] unorderd_map::insert_or_assign and try_emplace should only hash and mod once unless there is a rehash.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95079 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/92124] std::vector copy-assigning when it should move-assign.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92124 --- Comment #5 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Thu Jan 9 05:40:08 2020 New Revision: 280028 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=280028=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/92124 fix incorrect unordered container move assignment *

[Bug libstdc++/92124] std::vector copy-assigning when it should move-assign.

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92124 --- Comment #4 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Tue Jan 7 21:01:37 2020 New Revision: 279967 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=279967=gcc=rev Log: PR libstdc++/92124 fix incorrect container move assignment *

[Bug libstdc++/91263] unordered_map and unordered_set operator== double key comparison causes exponential behavior

||2020-01-06 CC||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #1 from François Dumont --- I confirm. I

[Bug libstdc++/91620] std::[forward_]list::remove_if/unique should respect to DR 526

||2019-12-19 CC||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #3 from François Dumont --- I take it !

[Bug libstdc++/91856] std::list::remove(const T& value) is broken with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG when value is a reference inside the list

||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Resolution|--- |FIXED Target Milestone|--- |9.0 --- Comment #1 from François Dumont --- This problem has already been fixed while upgrading std::list::remove signature for C++17. The fix

[Bug libstdc++/90409] std::move[_backward] could be more optimized for deque iterators

||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from François Dumont --- Patch awaiting on mailing list: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2019-06/msg00097.html

[Bug libstdc++/90277] Debug Mode test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90277 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/90277] Debug Mode test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90277 --- Comment #5 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Wed May 8 13:03:32 2019 New Revision: 271011 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=271011=gcc=rev Log: 2019-05-08 François Dumont PR libstdc++/90277 *

[Bug libstdc++/90277] Debug Mode test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90277 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/90277] Debug Mode test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=90277 --- Comment #1 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Sat May 4 07:41:39 2019 New Revision: 270870 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=270870=gcc=rev Log: Add missing PR libstdc++/90277 reference. Modified:

[Bug libstdc++/89477] Incorrect CTAD deduction guides for set and multiset

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89477 --- Comment #6 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Fri Mar 8 05:53:09 2019 New Revision: 269479 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269479=gcc=rev Log: 2019-03-08 François Dumont PR libstdc++/89477 *

[Bug libstdc++/89608] Undetected iterator invalidations on unordered containers in debug mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=89608 --- Comment #2 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Fri Mar 8 05:37:50 2019 New Revision: 269478 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=269478=gcc=rev Log: 2019-03-08 François Dumont PR libstdc++/89608 *

[Bug libstdc++/88199] [7/8 Regression] memory leak on unordered container move assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88199 --- Comment #4 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Wed Nov 28 06:27:28 2018 New Revision: 266543 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266543=gcc=rev Log: 2018-11-28 François Dumont PR libstdc++/88199 *

[Bug libstdc++/88199] [7/8 Regression] memory leak on unordered container move assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88199 --- Comment #3 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Wed Nov 28 06:19:38 2018 New Revision: 266542 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266542=gcc=rev Log: 2018-11-28 François Dumont PR libstdc++/88199 *

[Bug libstdc++/88199] [7/8/9 Regression] memory leak on unordered container move assignment

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88199 --- Comment #2 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Tue Nov 27 21:21:51 2018 New Revision: 266528 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=266528=gcc=rev Log: 2018-11-27 François Dumont PR libstdc++/88199 *

[Bug libstdc++/87872] debug list::splice should not call _M_transfer_from_if on self-splices

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87872 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/87872] debug list::splice should not call _M_transfer_from_if on self-splices

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87872 --- Comment #4 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Tue Nov 6 20:20:06 2018 New Revision: 265851 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265851=gcc=rev Log: 2018-11-06 John Bytheway PR libstdc++/87872 *

[Bug libstdc++/87872] debug list::splice should not call _M_transfer_from_if on self-splices

||2018-11-03 Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from François Dumont --- All this reflection looks perfectly fine to me, thanks reporting it. Don't you want to submit

[Bug libstdc++/87135] [C++17] unordered containers violate iterator validity requirements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87135 --- Comment #4 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Fri Sep 21 20:39:07 2018 New Revision: 264494 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264494=gcc=rev Log: 2018-09-21 François Dumont PR libstdc++/87135 *

[Bug libstdc++/87135] [C++17] unordered containers violate iterator validity requirements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87135 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Target Milestone|--- |9.0

[Bug libstdc++/87135] [C++17] unordered containers violate iterator validity requirements

|--- |FIXED Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from François Dumont --- Rehash policy has been reviewed, rehash will take place only when reserved size is overwhelmed.

[Bug libstdc++/87135] [C++17] unordered containers violate iterator validity requirements

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87135 --- Comment #2 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Tue Sep 18 20:36:16 2018 New Revision: 264413 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264413=gcc=rev Log: 2018-09-18 François Dumont PR libstdc++/87135 *

[Bug libstdc++/68222] _Safe_iterator provides operators the wrapped iterator can't actually support

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68222 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/68222] _Safe_iterator provides operators the wrapped iterator can't actually support

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68222 --- Comment #2 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Wed Aug 22 18:51:25 2018 New Revision: 263786 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=263786=gcc=rev Log: 2018-08-22 François Dumont PR libstdc++/68222 *

[Bug libstdc++/60519] Debug mode should check comparators for irreflexivity

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60519 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/83938] Speed up inplace_merge() algorithm & fix inefficient logic

||2018-07-24 CC||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Target Milestone|--- |9.0 Ever confirmed|0 |1

[Bug libstdc++/86272] [6/7/8/9 Regression] __gnu_debug::string uses undefined __glibcxx_check_insert_range2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86272 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/86272] [6/7/8/9 Regression] __gnu_debug::string uses undefined __glibcxx_check_insert_range2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86272 --- Comment #8 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Thu Jul 5 20:51:27 2018 New Revision: 262455 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262455=gcc=rev Log: 2018-07-05 François Dumont Backport from mainline

[Bug libstdc++/86272] [6/7/8/9 Regression] __gnu_debug::string uses undefined __glibcxx_check_insert_range2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86272 --- Comment #7 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Thu Jul 5 20:48:02 2018 New Revision: 262454 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262454=gcc=rev Log: 2018-07-05 François Dumont Backport from mainline

[Bug libstdc++/86272] [6/7/8/9 Regression] __gnu_debug::string uses undefined __glibcxx_check_insert_range2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86272 --- Comment #6 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Thu Jul 5 05:14:36 2018 New Revision: 262430 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262430=gcc=rev Log: 2018-07-05 François Dumont Backport from mainline

[Bug libstdc++/86272] [6/7/8/9 Regression] __gnu_debug::string uses undefined __glibcxx_check_insert_range2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86272 --- Comment #5 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Wed Jul 4 18:13:11 2018 New Revision: 262417 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=262417=gcc=rev Log: 2018-07-04 François Dumont PR libstdc++/86272 *

[Bug libstdc++/86272] [6/7/8/9 Regression] __gnu_debug::string uses undefined __glibcxx_check_insert_range2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86272 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/85768] [9 Regression] FreeBSD bootstrap fails due to undefined reference to 'backtrace'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85768 --- Comment #5 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Fri May 25 16:40:55 2018 New Revision: 260761 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260761=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-25 François Dumont PR libstdc++/85768

[Bug libstdc++/85768] [9 Regression] FreeBSD bootstrap fails due to undefined reference to 'backtrace'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85768 --- Comment #4 from François Dumont --- Created attachment 44187 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44187=edit Remove backtrace usage during bootstrap. I wonder if this patch could fix the bootstrap ? I try to avoid the usage

[Bug libstdc++/85845] [9 Regression] Many libstdc++ test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85845 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/85845] [9 Regression] Many libstdc++ test failures

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85845 --- Comment #2 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Mon May 21 16:51:47 2018 New Revision: 260478 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=260478=gcc=rev Log: 2018-05-21 François Dumont PR libstdc++/85845

[Bug libstdc++/85845] [9 Regression] Many libstdc++ test failures

|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/71181] Reserving in unordered_map doesn't reserve enough

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71181 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/85768] [9 Regression] FreeBSD bootstrap fails due to undefined reference to 'backtrace'

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85768 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/68222] _Safe_iterator provides operators the wrapped iterator can't actually support

||fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/68303] performance: unordered_map up to 7x speedup

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68303 --- Comment #3 from François Dumont --- Even if I always considered unordered containers to be high volume containers that's an interesting idea. As this is a pretty old entry I guess I'll have to try it myself.

[Bug libstdc++/84998] [8 Regression] std::hash<std::bitset> fails in Debug Mode

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84998 --- Comment #3 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Tue Mar 20 21:45:14 2018 New Revision: 258693 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=258693=gcc=rev Log: 2018-03-20 François Dumont PR libstdc++/84998

[Bug libstdc++/83709] Inserting duplicates into an unordered associative containers causes the container to invalidate iterators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83709 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/83709] Inserting duplicates into an unordered associative containers causes the container to invalidate iterators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83709 --- Comment #2 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Tue Jan 9 21:05:10 2018 New Revision: 256396 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256396=gcc=rev Log: 2018-01-09 François Dumont PR libstdc++/83709

[Bug libstdc++/83709] Inserting duplicates into an unordered associative containers causes the container to invalidate iterators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83709 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED Last reconfirmed|

[Bug libstdc++/83709] Inserting duplicates into an unordered associative containers causes the container to invalidate iterators

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83709 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/82522] std::map::insert(value_type &&) not selected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82522 --- Comment #9 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Thu Dec 28 05:37:54 2017 New Revision: 256018 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=256018=gcc=rev Log: 2017-12-28 François Dumont Backport from

[Bug libstdc++/82522] std::map::insert(value_type &&) not selected

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82522 --- Comment #8 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Wed Dec 20 21:53:25 2017 New Revision: 255904 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255904=gcc=rev Log: 2017-12-20 François Dumont PR libstdc++/82522

[Bug libstdc++/80761] std::set<T,C,A>::insert_return_type uses wrong iterator type

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80761 --- Comment #5 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Mon Dec 18 21:59:17 2017 New Revision: 255789 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=255789=gcc=rev Log: 2017-11-20 François Dumont PR libstdc++/80761

[Bug libstdc++/82558] [8 Regression] V8 JavaScript engine segfaults since r249235

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82558 --- Comment #4 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Mon Oct 16 05:44:03 2017 New Revision: 253776 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=253776=gcc=rev Log: 2017-10-16 François Dumont PR libstdc++/82558

[Bug libstdc++/82558] [8 Regression] V8 JavaScript engine segfaults since r249235

|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/81064] [8 Regression] Inline namespace regression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81064 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug libstdc++/81064] [8 Regression] Inline namespace regression

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81064 --- Comment #6 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Sun Jul 23 08:41:35 2017 New Revision: 250458 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=250458=gcc=rev Log: 2017-07-23 François Dumont PR libstdc++/81064

[Bug libstdc++/80183] [7 Regression] Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value: std::local_Rb_tree_decrement(std::_Rb_tree_node_base*) (tree.cc:97)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80183 --- Comment #7 from François Dumont --- (In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4) > I think this is my fault, I asked François to remove a store to _M_color > that I thought was redundant. I was surprised that _M_color wasn't move along

[Bug libstdc++/77459] [6/7 Regression] undefined reference to `snprintf' when building mingw-w64 cross-compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77459 François Dumont changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org

[Bug libstdc++/77459] [6/7 Regression] undefined reference to `snprintf' when building mingw-w64 cross-compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77459 --- Comment #8 from François Dumont --- Ok, at least it confirms what I thought about builtins. So the problem is rather a buggy target. Even if so I'll try to find an alternative approach to avoid snprintf usage.

[Bug libstdc++/77459] [6/7 Regression] undefined reference to `snprintf' when building mingw-w64 cross-compiler

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77459 --- Comment #6 from François Dumont --- Created attachment 39984 --> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=39984=edit Stop using __builtin_snprintf until __has_builtin is supported. Could you try this patch ? Until we have

[Bug libstdc++/71640] [7 Regression] include/c++/7.0.0/bits/hashtable.h:293:7: error: too many template parameters in template redeclaration

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71640 --- Comment #2 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Mon Jun 27 20:41:59 2016 New Revision: 237803 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237803=gcc=rev Log: 2016-06-27 François Dumont PR libstdc++/71640

[Bug libstdc++/71181] Reserving in unordered_map doesn't reserve enough

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71181 --- Comment #5 from François Dumont --- Author: fdumont Date: Mon Jun 20 20:04:25 2016 New Revision: 237617 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=237617=gcc=rev Log: 2016-06-20 François Dumont PR libstdc++/71181

[Bug libstdc++/71181] Reserving in unordered_map doesn't reserve enough

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71181 --- Comment #4 from François Dumont --- I guess you are talking about 61667. I think this report is quite new. At the moment reserve is implemented as proposed by the Standard but I agree with Alexey that demonstrated behavior is

[Bug libstdc++/54075] [4.7.1] unordered_map insert still slower than 4.6.2

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54075 --- Comment #50 from François Dumont --- This performance issue is a result of fixing: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41975 It resulted in many more modulo operations and so expensive float divisions. I plan to commit an

[Bug libstdc++/68880] [4.9 Regression][Bisected to r202992] std::operator< overload ignored when using std::lower_bound

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=68880 --- Comment #1 from François Dumont --- Not sure it is a regression. Of course before the patch the operator was called in namespace std so your operator was considered. Now we are using intermediate functor that are not in std namespace so your

[Bug libstdc++/60519] Debug mode should check comparators for irreflexivity

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60519 --- Comment #5 from François Dumont fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: fdumont Date: Tue Aug 25 20:27:03 2015 New Revision: 227189 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=227189root=gccview=rev Log: 2015-08-24 François Dumont fdum

[Bug libstdc++/65392] Bad mangled names in Debug Mode assertions

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65392 François Dumont fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED

[Bug libstdc++/64657] Support iterators with overloaded operator-comma

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64657 --- Comment #4 from François Dumont fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org --- Author: fdumont Date: Sat May 23 11:17:38 2015 New Revision: 223605 URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=223605root=gccview=rev Log: 2015-05-23 François Dumont fdum

[Bug libstdc++/60519] Debug mode should check comparators for irreflexivity

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60519 --- Comment #2 from François Dumont fdumont at gcc dot gnu.org --- Created attachment 35305 -- https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=35305action=edit Strict weak ordering debug check patch On my side here what I had plan to do

  1   2   >