This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]

Re: [RFC] Marking C++ new operator as malloc?

From: Joe Buck <Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot COM>
To: Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile at starynkevitch dot net>
Cc: Chris Lattner <clattner at apple dot com>, GCC Mailing List <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 18:36:33 -0700
Subject: Re: [RFC] Marking C++ new operator as malloc?
References: <20070907205343.GA22936@matfyz.cz> <EB93AAC0-964B-42BE-958A-1FF5CA078AE8@apple.com> <20070908051212.GA24635@synopsys.com> <CD86F976-926C-4E5D-9B28-4AEFE38A3B89@apple.com> <46E30329.3040909@starynkevitch.net>

On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 10:16:41PM +0200, Basile STARYNKEVITCH wrote:
> Maybe it could make sense to give the malloc attribute only to 
> ::operator new but not to other new-s, in particular not to the 
> placement new?

It would be completely wrong to give the attribute to placement new,
as the return value *always* aliases the memory you passed it to
supply the place.

References:
- [RFC] Marking C++ new operator as malloc?
  - From: Martin Jambor
- Re: [RFC] Marking C++ new operator as malloc?
  - From: Chris Lattner
- Re: [RFC] Marking C++ new operator as malloc?
  - From: Joe Buck
- Re: [RFC] Marking C++ new operator as malloc?
  - From: Chris Lattner
- Re: [RFC] Marking C++ new operator as malloc?
  - From: Basile STARYNKEVITCH

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