Martin Sebor wrote: > Does the replace test fail as well? Since insert() just calls > replace() I would expect it to fail. If it doesn't, either the replace test isn't exhaustive enough or what you're seeing is due to a problem in something other than string.
Current replace test version doesn't exercise this case. I am updating this test now. Martin Sebor wrote: > FWIW, it doesn't fail with gcc 3.4.3 on Cygwin. That might be because the MSVC debug library behaves differently (e.g., it scribbles over freed/uninitialized memory). It works fine on MSVC. The test fails on SuSe Linux 9.1 with gcc 4.0.2 only. And it looks like this is a problem on my local machine - Liviu couldn't reproduce it. When I finish the replace test I'll clean up all on my Linux machine and build the library from scratch again. Thanks, Anton Pevtsov. -----Original Message----- From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 15:52 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: basic_string::insert (iterator p, InputIterator first, InputIterator last) on Linux, gcc-4.0.2 Anton Pevtsov wrote: > The basic_string::insert (iterator p, InputIterator first, > InputIterator > last) doesn't work correctly on Linux for string str when > first = str.begin() + 1, last = str.begin() + 3. Does the replace test fail as well? Since insert() just calls replace() I would expect it to fail. If it doesn't, either the replace test isn't exhaustive enough or what you're seeing is due to a problem in something other than string. FWIW, it doesn't fail with gcc 3.4.3 on Cygwin. That might be because the MSVC debug library behaves differently (e.g., it scribbles over freed/uninitialized memory). Martin
