This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug other/27156] SIGSEGV in operator delete() / wrong-code?
- From: "pluto at agmk dot net" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 19 Apr 2006 08:33:23 -0000
- Subject: [Bug other/27156] SIGSEGV in operator delete() / wrong-code?
- References: <bug-27156-7667@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #5 from pluto at agmk dot net 2006-04-19 08:33 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> Are you sure that you are not mixing operator new and deletes up so the
> stlport's operator delete is being called on memory allocated from
> operator new from libstdc++?
STLport uses __stl_{new,delete} which uses ::operator {new,delete}
from g++'s <new> header. I don't see any mixing in preprocessed sources.
Moreover libstdc++ isn't linked in the testcase.
$ ldd testDrv
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000)
libstlport.so.5.0 => /local/devel/buildenv41/i486-gnu-linux/
STLport/lib/libstlport.so.5.0 (0x5556d000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0x55612000)
libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x5572c000)
libpthread.so.0 => /lib/tls/libpthread.so.0 (0x55734000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/tls/libm.so.6 (0x55746000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x55555000)
> Also is there a reason why you are using stlport?
[1]
It has faster std::string implementation
which I need for large Tcl/Tk based GUI.
[2]
I'm using it in multiplatform project with different compilers
(win32(vc2003), linux(g++), solaris(g++, sunworkshop)).
It gives me a one STL implementation for whole project.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27156