From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3708 invoked by alias); 27 Mar 2007 08:07:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 2173 invoked by uid 48); 27 Mar 2007 08:07:36 -0000 Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:07:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20070327080736.2167.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug libstdc++/31370] resizing bugs in std::vector In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "pcarlini at suse dot de" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-03/txt/msg02543.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #5 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2007-03-27 09:07 ------- Thanks. On the mainline and 4_2-branch we have new definitions of max_size, taking into account, as should be, allocator::max_size. Can you please check the vector bits in this light? (well, about the status of vector, Andrew is overstating the issue a bit, but mostly right: we aren't that much motivated in improving it, but we have to do that anyway as long as it stays in the standard, recently we improved its performance quite a bit in a few areas). One final observation: if you feel like contributing other improvements, please consider filing the necessary Copyright Assignment paperworks: your patch will be close to the maximum we can get in as a "small contribution" under relaxed rules: http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html -- pcarlini at suse dot de changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pcarlini at suse dot de Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1 Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2007-03-27 09:07:36 date| | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31370