This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/36159] C++ compiler should issue a warning with missing new operator
- From: "fw at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:20:19 +0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/36159] C++ compiler should issue a warning with missing new operator
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-36159-4 at http dot gcc dot gnu dot org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36159
Florian Weimer <fw at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://sourceware.org/bugz
| |illa/show_bug.cgi?id=6527
--- Comment #19 from Florian Weimer <fw at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Current (unreleased) glibc usues this:
# define MALLOC_ALIGNMENT (2 * SIZE_SZ < __alignof__ (long double) \
? __alignof__ (long double) : 2 * SIZE_SZ)
So the old bug https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6527 is gone.
To my knowledge, this level of alignment is sufficient to cover max_align_t.
These malloc changes are in principle back-portable, but they are a bit on the
risky side because where the definition of MALLOC_ALIGNMENT changes, malloc
allocation patterns (and eventually RSS usage) are affected.