This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug libstdc++/59894] Force use of the default new/delete


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59894

--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Markus Trippelsdorf from comment #1)
> Isn't inlining forbidden by the standard?

Yes (sorry, I mentioned that in PR 59875 and forgot to repeat it here), but
since this is a specific option where the user explicitly asks for the
non-standard behavior...

Besides, the rationale in issue 404 seems bogus, I can use an inline
replacement memory allocation function just fine with gcc, and it has value to
several users.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]