Re: [Bug libstdc++/14493] No std::bad_alloc::what() const

[Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>]

"pme at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
>> It appears to me that the original reporter wanted what() to return
>> an "intelligible error message" a la icc's "bad allocation", rather
>> than "St9bad_alloc"  (which does communicate the same information but
>> in a more cryptic fashion).
>
> Slap a _Z on that thing and we could demangle it automatically.  The
> problems with doing so are that the demangling routines are linked in
> when they otherwise wouldn't be (so goes the argument, but I haven't
> verified it myself).

Honestly, is "std::bad_alloc" really that much more readable than
"St9bad_alloc"?  Especially compared to "bad allocation"?

zw