[RFC/Patch] What about using seekoff(-1, ...) for unbuffered underflow?

[Paolo Carlini]

Benjamin Kosnik wrote:

>>Seems like a possibility...
>>
>
>Indeed, looks great, and restores the _M_buf_size placement that
>everybody wants... if it passes make check then feel free to check this in.
>
Thanks. Indeed passes make check ...

>>However, I agree _completely_ with your concerns (I hadn't considered
>>locales, damn!) and also, let me add that, even if we don't care much,
>>this additional use of the single pback char we have available implies
>>that (both in yours and mine solution) after any sgetc() the pback area
>>is full! Therefore no chars can be pback at all upon request!
>>This seems bad.
>>
>>What to do?
>>
>The locale bit actually doesn't apply at the moment, so scratch that
>line of argumentation.
>
>I think pbackfail will still work correctly, even if the pback buffer is
>full. So, I don't think this is an issue.
>
... however, I like even more the below, slightly simpler and which 
definitely
keeps pbackfail working correctly (I will prepare a testcase for this, 
anyway).

Tomorrow, if nobody objects, I will prepare Changelog entry, test again, 
commit.

Thanks!
Paolo.

//////////
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: patch_prop3
URL: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/attachments/20030606/616d031e/attachment.ksh>