[RFC] Two versions of struct _Rb_tree_impl... or not?!

[Paolo Carlini]

Dhruv Matani wrote:

>Yes precuisely. Actually, the original code did do exactly that and reduced
>the size of the rb_tree, but it failed reg-testing, so it ws removed.
>However, I do have a patch ready. (I had posted it to the list about a month
>ago)
>  
>
Ok, now I see. Thanks.

Are you talking about this patch

    http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2004-04/msg00079.html

???

Is it regtested, up to date, etc., etc. ... ?

Thanks again,
Paolo.