Re: [PATCH][_Hashtable] Fix some implementation inconsistencies

["François Dumont" <frs.dumont@gmail.com>]

No chance ?

On 22/05/2024 06:50, François Dumont wrote:
> Ping ?
>
> On 13/05/2024 06:33, François Dumont wrote:
>> libstdc++: [_Hashtable] Fix some implementation inconsistencies
>>
>>     Get rid of the different usages of the mutable keyword except in
>>     _Prime_rehash_policy where it is preserved for abi compatibility 
>> reason.
>>
>>     Fix comment to explain that we need the computation of bucket 
>> index noexcept
>>     to be able to rehash the container when needed.
>>
>>     For Standard instantiations through std::unordered_xxx containers 
>> we already
>>     force caching of hash code when hash functor is not noexcep so it 
>> is guarantied.
>>
>>     The static_assert purpose in _Hashtable on _M_bucket_index is 
>> thus limited
>>     to usages of _Hashtable with exotic _Hashtable_traits.
>>
>>     libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
>>
>>             * include/bits/hashtable_policy.h 
>> (_NodeBuilder<>::_S_build): Remove
>>             const qualification on _NodeGenerator instance.
>> (_ReuseOrAllocNode<>::operator()(_Args&&...)): Remove const 
>> qualification.
>>             (_ReuseOrAllocNode<>::_M_nodes): Remove mutable.
>>             (_Insert_base<>::_M_insert_range): Remove _NodeGetter 
>> const qualification.
>>             (_Hash_code_base<>::_M_bucket_index(const 
>> _Hash_node_value<>&, size_t)):
>>             Simplify noexcept declaration, we already static_assert 
>> that _RangeHash functor
>>             is noexcept.
>>             * include/bits/hashtable.h: Rework comments. Remove const 
>> qualifier on
>>             _NodeGenerator& arguments.
>>
>> Tested under Linux x64, ok to commit ?
>>
>> François
>>