Re: [PATCH, libstdc++/61166] overflow when parse number in std::duration operator

2014-05-16 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 15/05/14 22:54 -0400, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: On 05/15/2014 03:03 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: Here's a finished patch to simplify bits/parse_numbers.h Tested x86_64-linux. Ed, any objection to this version? This looks great, thanks! I committed that to trunk, I'll put it on the 4.9

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++/61166] overflow when parse number in std::duration operator

2014-05-15 Thread Jonathan Wakely
Here's a finished patch to simplify bits/parse_numbers.h Tested x86_64-linux. Ed, any objection to this version? commit 87d26af2fc07f0c45a0a6676161ae1db1d7541b7 Author: Jonathan Wakely jwak...@redhat.com Date: Wed May 14 16:35:20 2014 +0100 2014-05-15 Ed Smith-Rowland

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++/61166] overflow when parse number in std::duration operator

2014-05-15 Thread Ed Smith-Rowland
On 05/15/2014 03:03 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: Here's a finished patch to simplify bits/parse_numbers.h Tested x86_64-linux. Ed, any objection to this version? This looks great, thanks! Having done that should we actually stop using it as suggested in the bug trail? ;-)

[PATCH, libstdc++/61166] overflow when parse number in std::duration operator

2014-05-14 Thread Ed Smith-Rowland
Make the machinery in bits/parse_number.h unsigned long long. I had actually noticed this a while back but we were in stage 4. Then I forgot.. :-/ Built and tested on x84_64-linux. OK? 2014-05-14 Ed Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net libstdc++/61166 overflow when parse number in

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++/61166] overflow when parse number in std::duration operator

2014-05-14 Thread Daniel Krügler
2014-05-14 15:38 GMT+02:00 Ed Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net: Make the machinery in bits/parse_number.h unsigned long long. I had actually noticed this a while back but we were in stage 4. Then I forgot.. :-/ Built and tested on x84_64-linux. OK? I understand the reason why the

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++/61166] overflow when parse number in std::duration operator

2014-05-14 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 14 May 2014 14:59, Daniel Krügler wrote: 2014-05-14 15:38 GMT+02:00 Ed Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net: Make the machinery in bits/parse_number.h unsigned long long. I had actually noticed this a while back but we were in stage 4. Then I forgot.. :-/ Built and tested on x84_64-linux.

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++/61166] overflow when parse number in std::duration operator

2014-05-14 Thread Ed Smith-Rowland
On 05/14/2014 09:59 AM, Daniel Krügler wrote: 2014-05-14 15:38 GMT+02:00 Ed Smith-Rowland 3dw...@verizon.net: Make the machinery in bits/parse_number.h unsigned long long. I had actually noticed this a while back but we were in stage 4. Then I forgot.. :-/ Built and tested on x84_64-linux.

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++/61166] overflow when parse number in std::duration operator

2014-05-14 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 14 May 2014 15:25, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: But in keeping with, say, our extension type traits and such maybe i should uglify value as well. No, just derive from std::integral_constant and you get value for free. You already use integral_constant in that file, so the name value is already

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++/61166] overflow when parse number in std::duration operator

2014-05-14 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 14 May 2014 15:36, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 14 May 2014 15:25, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: But in keeping with, say, our extension type traits and such maybe i should uglify value as well. No, just derive from std::integral_constant and you get value for free. You already use

Re: [PATCH, libstdc++/61166] overflow when parse number in std::duration operator

2014-05-14 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 14/05/14 15:41 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 14 May 2014 15:36, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 14 May 2014 15:25, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: But in keeping with, say, our extension type traits and such maybe i should uglify value as well. No, just derive from std::integral_constant and you get