incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Anton Pevtsov" <Ant...@moscow.vdiweb.com>
Subject RE: test for lib.string.cons
Date Mon, 15 May 2006 15:19:49 GMT
Martin Sebor wrote:
>Btw., it's beginning to look like we might run out of bits in the
bitmap. If it happens we'll probably have to split it into two data
members, one for the signature and one for the function id.

Yes, we will run out of bits in the bitmap. The are next methods not
added to the bitmap yet:
begin(), end(), rbegin(), rend(), c_str(), data(), capacity(), size(),
resize(), length(), max_size(), reserve(), empty(), clear() (the
21.string.capacity test has the old style), and all nonmembers
(operators +, < , <=, >, >=, ==, !=).
So it looks like we are needed two fields for function id and one for
the signature id. 

I plan to update the capacity test and write new one for iterators,
c_str() and data. 
Btw., there is a question abpout signatures: are we needed in special
signatures for our allocator (i.e to have smth. like  (size_type,
size_type) and (size_type, size_type, allocator) )?


Thanks,
Anton Pevtsov


-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:sebor@roguewave.com] 
Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 03:29
To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: test for lib.string.cons


Anton Pevtsov wrote:
> Here is the ported test for lib.string.cons and required differences 
> to the 21.strings.h/cpp files (with changes required for
> lib.string.access): http://people.apache.org/~antonp/stdcxx05102006/

Please go ahead and commit this whenever you have a chance. Btw., it's
beginning to look like we might run out of bits in the bitmap. If it
happens we'll probably have to split it into two data members, one for
the signature and one for the function id.

Martin

[...]
> If the test structure is ok, I'll extend the test cases using 
> char@count directive.
> 
> Here is a question about the ctor exception safety test. Are they 
> needed when the default allocator is used? I think that we may test 
> all possible exception safety issues using the custom allocator.

True, but the std::string and std::wstring specializations would need to
be exercised even if they weren't generated from the primary template
(i.e., if they or some of their members were explicitly specialized,
although they aren't at this point), and the only way to exercise them
in that case would be via the replacement operator new.

Martin

Mime
View raw message