| Message ID | 6edc763b-e463-a676-0232-7b2193fb403b@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Avoid allocator operator== in _Safe_container | expand |
On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:26, François Dumont via Libstdc++ <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > Some newly introduced tests in > 23_containers/unordered_map/cons/default.cc revealed that we are forcing > the allocator type to have a operator==. All allocators are required to have operator== so that should not be a problem. What is the error?
On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:26, François Dumont via Libstdc++ > <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > > Some newly introduced tests in > > 23_containers/unordered_map/cons/default.cc revealed that we are forcing > > the allocator type to have a operator==. > > All allocators are required to have operator== so that should not be a > problem. What is the error? OK, I see it. I just forgot to define operator== and operator!= for the custom allocator in that new test, and that should be added.
On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:34, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > > > On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:26, François Dumont via Libstdc++ > > <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > > > > Some newly introduced tests in > > > 23_containers/unordered_map/cons/default.cc revealed that we are forcing > > > the allocator type to have a operator==. > > > > All allocators are required to have operator== so that should not be a > > problem. What is the error? > > OK, I see it. I just forgot to define operator== and operator!= for > the custom allocator in that new test, and that should be added. Fixed like this instead. Tested x86_64-linux with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG. Pushed to trunk. commit 2eff2a3cb521c58212885a3dca638764285b5691 Author: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> Date: Mon Aug 9 11:36:07 2021 libstdc++: Make allocator equality comparable in tests libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog: * testsuite/23_containers/unordered_map/cons/default.cc: Add equality comparison operators to allocator. * testsuite/23_containers/unordered_set/cons/default.cc: Likewise. diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/unordered_map/cons/default.cc b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/unordered_map/cons/default.cc index d64d078a7da..7a785e980b1 100644 --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/unordered_map/cons/default.cc +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/unordered_map/cons/default.cc @@ -18,6 +18,9 @@ template<typename T> void deallocate(T *p, std::size_t n) { std::allocator<T>().deallocate(p, n); } + + bool operator==(const NoDefaultConsAlloc&) const { return true; } + bool operator!=(const NoDefaultConsAlloc&) const { return false; } }; using Map = std::unordered_map<int, int, std::hash<int>, std::equal_to<int>, diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/unordered_set/cons/default.cc b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/unordered_set/cons/default.cc index 41281d3d774..fb87c96ce9d 100644 --- a/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/unordered_set/cons/default.cc +++ b/libstdc++-v3/testsuite/23_containers/unordered_set/cons/default.cc @@ -18,6 +18,9 @@ template<typename T> void deallocate(T *p, std::size_t n) { std::allocator<T>().deallocate(p, n); } + + bool operator==(const NoDefaultConsAlloc&) const { return true; } + bool operator!=(const NoDefaultConsAlloc&) const { return false; } }; using Set = std::unordered_set<int, std::hash<int>, std::equal_to<int>,
On 09/08/21 12:45 pm, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:34, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >>> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:26, François Dumont via Libstdc++ >>> <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>>> Some newly introduced tests in >>>> 23_containers/unordered_map/cons/default.cc revealed that we are forcing >>>> the allocator type to have a operator==. >>> All allocators are required to have operator== so that should not be a >>> problem. What is the error? >> OK, I see it. I just forgot to define operator== and operator!= for >> the custom allocator in that new test, and that should be added. > Fixed like this instead. Tested x86_64-linux with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG. > Pushed to trunk. Ok, I thought my change was better because we have many allocator types in tests without operator ==/!= (see 23_containers/*/cons/noexcept_default_construct.cc). But of course the tests are not making any use of it for the moment, no big deal. So this patch is just an optimization, may I still commit it ? Unless you like the fact that Debug mode is checking that those operators are provided when allocator-aware move constructor is being used.
On 09/08/21 1:52 pm, François Dumont wrote: > On 09/08/21 12:45 pm, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:34, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >>> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >>>> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:26, François Dumont via Libstdc++ >>>> <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: >>>>> Some newly introduced tests in >>>>> 23_containers/unordered_map/cons/default.cc revealed that we are >>>>> forcing >>>>> the allocator type to have a operator==. >>>> All allocators are required to have operator== so that should not be a >>>> problem. What is the error? >>> OK, I see it. I just forgot to define operator== and operator!= for >>> the custom allocator in that new test, and that should be added. >> Fixed like this instead. Tested x86_64-linux with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG. >> Pushed to trunk. > > Ok, I thought my change was better because we have many allocator > types in tests without operator ==/!= (see > 23_containers/*/cons/noexcept_default_construct.cc). But of course the > tests are not making any use of it for the moment, no big deal. > > So this patch is just an optimization, may I still commit it ? Unless > you like the fact that Debug mode is checking that those operators are > provided when allocator-aware move constructor is being used. > > A simpler version, using _Safe_container move constructor when allocator instances are always equals.
On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 13:08, François Dumont <frs.dumont@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 09/08/21 1:52 pm, François Dumont wrote: > > On 09/08/21 12:45 pm, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:34, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >>> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:33, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >>>> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 11:26, François Dumont via Libstdc++ > >>>> <libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > >>>>> Some newly introduced tests in > >>>>> 23_containers/unordered_map/cons/default.cc revealed that we are > >>>>> forcing > >>>>> the allocator type to have a operator==. > >>>> All allocators are required to have operator== so that should not be a > >>>> problem. What is the error? > >>> OK, I see it. I just forgot to define operator== and operator!= for > >>> the custom allocator in that new test, and that should be added. > >> Fixed like this instead. Tested x86_64-linux with -D_GLIBCXX_DEBUG. > >> Pushed to trunk. > > > > Ok, I thought my change was better because we have many allocator > > types in tests without operator ==/!= (see > > 23_containers/*/cons/noexcept_default_construct.cc). But of course the > > tests are not making any use of it for the moment, no big deal. Those tests are all OK, the allocators inherit from std::allocator so can use its equality operators. But if I did mess up any more test allocators then we should fix those ones too. > > So this patch is just an optimization, may I still commit it ? Unless > > you like the fact that Debug mode is checking that those operators are > > provided when allocator-aware move constructor is being used. > > > > > A simpler version, using _Safe_container move constructor when allocator > instances are always equals. Yes, this optimization is good. OK for trunk, thanks!
diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/safe_container.h b/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/safe_container.h index d9636c29e9b..b06c33dac7e 100644 --- a/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/safe_container.h +++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/debug/safe_container.h @@ -57,7 +57,12 @@ namespace __gnu_debug _Safe_container(const _Safe_container&) = default; _Safe_container(_Safe_container&&) = default; - _Safe_container(_Safe_container&& __x, const _Alloc& __a) + private: + _Safe_container(_Safe_container&& __x, const _Alloc& __a, std::true_type) + : _Safe_container() + { _Base::_M_swap(__x); } + + _Safe_container(_Safe_container&& __x, const _Alloc& __a, std::false_type) : _Safe_container() { if (__x._M_cont().get_allocator() == __a) @@ -65,6 +70,12 @@ namespace __gnu_debug else __x._M_invalidate_all(); } + + protected: + _Safe_container(_Safe_container&& __x, const _Alloc& __a) + : _Safe_container(std::move(__x), __a, + typename std::allocator_traits<_Alloc>::is_always_equal{}) + { } #endif public: