incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>
Subject Re: test for lib.string::operator+
Date Tue, 23 May 2006 15:11:39 GMT
Anton Pevtsov wrote:
> Martin Sebor wrote:
> 
>> <>I've been playing with this a bit and it turns out that we do have
> 
> 
>> <>enough bits if we only make better use of them :) Here's how we can
>> squeeze all the functions and their signatures into 32 bits:
>> [...]
> 
> 
>> <>A 32-bit OverloadId enum has room for the 5 bit MemberId and
>> up to six 4-bit ArgId's. Since no string member function has more than
> 
> 
>> <>5 arguments we even have 3 whole bits to spare! :)
>>
> 
> Great!
> One minor question: what about non-members? The enum is still named
> MemberId, so the adding elements for non-members into it looks
> inconvenient.

I agree. Let me rename it to something like FunctionId. We should
probably also give the StringMembers struct a better name. Let me
work on it tomorrow.

> But I updated the operator+ test using the latest versions of enums. The
> diffs and the test are attached.
> <>
> Martin Sebor wrote:
> 
>> <>Btw., you will notice that I've introduced arg_alloc and a bunch of
> 
> 
>> <>new ctor constants, one for each of the basic_string ctors that 
>> takes an
>> Allocator argument, so we'll be ready can extend the ctor test to
>> exercise the allocators.
>>
> 
> I see, thanks. I'll update the test when the changes to 
> 21.strings.h/.cpp appears on the svn.

Okay. I was busy with other things today (actually yesterday,
I forgot to send this last night) but I'm hoping to wrap it
up today.

Martin

Mime
View raw message