This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC] Marking C++ new operator as malloc?
Joe Buck <Joe.Buck@synopsys.COM> writes:
| On Sat, Sep 08, 2007 at 04:33:50PM -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| > "Richard Guenther" <richard.guenther@gmail.com> writes:
| >
| > | On 9/8/07, Chris Lattner <clattner@apple.com> wrote:
| > | > I understand, but allowing users to override new means that the actual
| > | > implementation may not honor the aliasing guarantees of attribute
| > | > malloc.
| > |
| > | Well, you can argue that all hell breaks lose if you do so. A sane ::new
| > | is required for almost everything :)
| >
| > I suspect the question is how to you distinguish a sane new from an an
| > insane one.
|
| Does it matter?
No, it does not.
The reason is 3.7.3.1/2
[...] If the request succeeds, the value returned shall be a nonnull
pointer value (4.10) p0 different from any previously returned value
p1, unless that value p1 was subsequently passed to an operator delete.
-- Gaby