From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 5003F386F837; Tue, 12 May 2020 11:26:51 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 5003F386F837 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1589282811; bh=mCZQRLVlb54RCKm9nIwpsTQmbehYxlQV7V6U8+/4xWk=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=O9If9fk82S8lujZ+LrTBabsbMAvOsuQBlEtJ9B2E5z380FwwKECtwUozP3ixN6Pll F8jzOipzn262Uyx/9E/pTWq6Apa4JS3Zz/iblz+Ktd8BNuPNS6k9qYjWWFqMoCRTXz 1wA5NBt64f1na08gLrcPf3IcRlddiSGk1CPeXebw= From: "redi at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libstdc++/95079] unorderd_map::insert_or_assign and try_emplace should only hash and mod once unless there is a rehash. Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 11:26:51 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: libstdc++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.1.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: missed-optimization X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: redi at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: everconfirmed bug_status cf_reconfirmed_on Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 11:26:51 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D95079 Jonathan Wakely changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Last reconfirmed| |2020-05-12 --- Comment #1 from Jonathan Wakely --- Agreed, thanks for the analysis.=